Whitehead’s paradox

We also see that the term PePx /2, which led to Whitehead s paradox, matches automatically with a term in the outer solution. As suggested earlier, it is now evident that Whitehead s... 

This makes Vp-Vvp = 0(r ), which obviously gives rise to a particular integral of the perturbation equations of the form v, =0(r ). There is now no difficulty in finding a complementary function to permit satisfying the boundary conditions (192). Whitehead s paradox does not therefore extend to such rotary motions. These may be handled by the conventional perturbation scheme proposed by Whitehead. 

Whitehead s paradox was resolved by Oseen (03, 04), who pointed out a fundamental inconsistency in connection with Stokes-type approximations of the streaming flow problem. This lack of internal consistency is evident if we compute the ratio of inertial to viscous terms from Stokes solution (196). 

Using the criterion of relevance can be a tragic joke. Perhaps the most ironic of all such developments is to be found in the evolution of mathematical logic and of the theory of sets. These used to be regarded as the most abstruse and esoteric branches of mathematics, rather more of philosophy than of mathematics. Then came the Russell-Whitehead paradox, Goedel s proofs of the completeness of the Predicate Calculus (1930) and of the incompleteness of arithmetic (1931). He used computable... 

---