Re: Borel set

Dave L. Renfro <renfr1dl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

If we're going to toss out the axiom of choice, you
may as well toss out most everything in real analysis,

That's an unfair argument in this connection, since
countable choice (and even dependent choice) should be
considered independently:
I think no one working in analysis would seriously reject DC.
The examples which you give are no problem with DC.
However, AC in general (or at least some weaker form, leading
to non-Lebesgue measurable sets) is a different story.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Borel set
    ... Dave L. Renfro wrote: ... may as well toss out most everything in real analysis, ... countable choice (and even dependent choice) should be ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Damn you, FEDEX! or Nikon D40 lost in Springfield, MO blackhole.
    ... the 2 mp Mavica he had been using with a Nikon D40. ... After shopping around, he got me to order one for him. ... The shipper had it insured, but from what I have read it could take weeks to sort this crap out. ... You may get your insurance from FedEx and a couple weeks later they find it and deliver it. ...
    (alt.photography)
  • Re: Functions that take sets of measure zero to sets of measure zero
    ... Dave L. Renfro wrote: ... this is called the Banach-Zarecki theorem. ... 1997 text "Real Analysis" and saw this as Theorem 7.11 ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: The Sci-Fi Rejection Letter That Time Forgot
    ... nations have stockpiled arsenals of these incredible bombs and the time the story is set. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: Richard Wagner = WEASEL
    ... > Just thought I'd toss this out to see if anyone agreed. ... > music (in a very general way, mind you0, but on the whole I have to say ... I'd say in lost learned circles, that's considered an axiom. ... Prev by Date: ...
    (rec.music.compose)