>>84
By Godel's incompleteness theorms, we cannot even know if arithmetic is consistent
As I said "there are no contradictions, except those we invent/define."
Mathematicians are trying to solve nonsense problems, they created themselves by some wrong definition of "consistency" in a poorly defined framework, that rests on some crazy axioms (see ZFC), purpose of which a layman wont get without tracing full 20st century history of mathematics, which is full of hacks and silly conventions.
You define something, but you don't know if it's sound or consistent(free of contradictions), or if it's true or false.
It's consitent, when it's parts are consistent, together with their composition.
they can hope to discover such contradictions if they exist (otherwise they will work on a false theory).
Like the Banach-Tarski Theorem, which postulates that given single orange you can transform it into two oranges, by the sole power of applying Set Theory axioms. Behold The Wonder of Infinity's Creation!