Re: what makes it true?
- From: mareg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ()
- Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 08:11:25 +0000 (UTC)
In article <slrndhmun9.to4.tim-usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Timothy Little <tim-usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>mareg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx () wrote:
>> Given that neither CH not not CH can be deduced from the other
>> axioms of set theory, this is not surprising! It is doubtful whether
>> the notions of "true" and "false" can meaningfully be attached to
>> the Continuum Hypothesis.
>
>And if it turns out that neither GC nor not-GC can be deduced from the
>axioms...?
Then we would know that GC was true.
I am not sure where this discussion is leading. The original question was
something like "Can a mathematical statement be true without it having been
proved?", and it still seems to me that the simple answer is yes.
Do you disagree with that?
I don't think many people would argue that FLT was not true in 1980.
Derek Holt.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: what makes it true?
- From: Timothy Little
- Re: what makes it true?
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: what makes it true?
- References:
- what makes it true?
- From: lhlhsand
- Re: what makes it true?
- From: Timothy Little
- Re: what makes it true?
- From:
- Re: what makes it true?
- From: Timothy Little
- what makes it true?
- Prev by Date: Re: How to calculate two curves equidistant from a given curve?
- Next by Date: Re: How to calculate two curves equidistant from a given curve?
- Previous by thread: Re: what makes it true?
- Next by thread: Re: what makes it true?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|