Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory

On Jul 15, 3:00 pm, "Stephen J. Herschkorn" <sjhersc...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
There are two things to consider here.

...

So it is very useful to be able to speak of the *set* of natural numbers
and more generally of infinite sets. Thus, we include the Axiom of
Infinity in our foundation.

Thank you for this long post and other information
that you have provided. I'm on the verge of giving
up the notion that there are some simple proofs that
need not invoke set theory, explicitly or implicitly.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why does Cantor a target for cranks?
    ... It has a lot to do with the choice also to do mathematics ... the two nonconstructive ones are the axiom of ... computable reals are complete and uncountable. ... and refrain from using infinite sets. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: abundance of irrationals!)
    ... > which is not smaller han the cardinality of that set. ... all sets of naturals begs the very question of whether there are ... because we dobt the existence of infinite sets. ... >>> There is neither any axiom asserting the existence of actual ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: I dont like the Axiom of Choice
    ... about the universe of transfinite sets without actually clearly ... happens when one deals with infinite sets. ... And this is what the Axiom of Choice is doing - making claims without ... how much of my number theory and discrete mathematics education should ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cantors circular "proof" that evens = integers
    ... And I am not saying he should not have been talking: ... If it helps to make the process shorter, I already know that if the axioms of set theory can be used to prove that "2n e N whenever n e N," then it follows that N ~ E. In Cantor's day, since no one was even dealing with infinite sets, obviously no one had answered questions such as, "in an infinite set, can we assume that if n e N, then 2n e N? ... What I found interesting about Moe's post was that 2n e N if we can use the axiom of choice, but you're right, I missed or forgot that you said that this is true under the axiom of choice. ... However, remember that you gave an unsupported CLAIM, and until I see the proofs that it follows from the axiom of choice that N ~ E, I cannot see whether such proofs do the same thing that the proofs I have so far seen that N ~ E do, namely ASSUME, somewhere, something equivalent to 2n e N. For what it's worth, I am certain that 2n is NOT e N is a perfectly valid alternative axiom -- again, see the Dichotomy -- and that we have either two valid branches of mathematics, like Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry, or we have ONE valid branch, with the 2n e N being the branch that gets tossed out. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Galileos Paradox and the Project of the Reals
    ... Please state the axiom of infinity. ... Set theory doesn't talk about "size" as far as I ... Cardinality is an extension of finite size, ... So, when it comes to infinite sets, this notion of order, however it is implemented in the definition, should be considered in relative "set" measures. ...
    (sci.math)