Re: cantorian algebra

Virgil wrote:

In article <f258e$46d2a00b$82a1e228$4192@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

aatu.koskensilta@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

tommy1729 wrote:

if you read for instance the work of Riemann or even better
prof. Andrew Wiles , you will notice an enormous amounts of
connections between "different" branches.

It might amuse you to know that Wiles's proof of Fermat's last theorem
is highly infinitary, and in particular in its current form relies on
the existence of two inaccessible cardinals -- though I have been
assured by experts that removing these, so that the proof goes through
in ZFC, would be routine (for some values of "routine").

What ?! "Relies on the existence of two inaccessible cardinals" ?!
How about the idea then that Wiles's proof might simply be wrong !

Wiles proof has been vetted by mathematicians much more competent at mathematics than HdB will ever be, so if he has doubts about that proof, he will have to search for his alleged errors himsmelf.

Mind that I don't care? A proof that relies on things that cannot exist,
like aleph's or omega's, should be considered as invalid. It's very much
the same with the so-called proof that the Goodstein sequence must end,
while numerical experience clearly indicates that it does not. Shame on
mathematics! Competence? Don't let me laugh! Disclaimer: this jibes are
under the strict condition that the statement "relies on the existence
of two inaccessible cardinals" is indeed true and essential to the proof
and that this step cannot be replaced by something acceptable/finitary.
Iff such is the case, then the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is still
open. (Since Wiles's proof is courtroom style, I had my doubts anyway.)

Han de Bruijn

.

Relevant Pages

  • 1/360X2=0.00555555555 X 19=0.105555555555 =0.1- "YOUR MATHEMATICS PARIS IS BURNING"
    ... DR Andrew Wiles, Dr Edgar Escultura, ... mathematics. ... than you and the Professor Escultura need to go to a candle ... Good day to you, too Sir Andrew Wiles! ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Russian Engineer Proves Fermats Theorem
    ... Fermat’s Last Theorem was proven by Andrew Wiles, a professor of Princeton, in 1994. ... After being tested for about a year, his proofs were deemed accurate and published in the Annals of Mathematics. ...
    (soc.culture.russian)
  • Re: Prime numbers, counting tells it all
    ... Their word against the mathematics. ... So you've read and understood Andrew Wiles' proof of FLT? ... His approach fails by the logical fallacy Cum Hoc, ... problem was an informal fallacy about causality. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: cantorian algebra
    ... prof. Andrew Wiles, you will notice an enormous amounts of ... HdB is not a mathematician (is this surprising after ... It is HdB's competence at mathematics which I was denigrating. ...
    (sci.math)
  • -- did andrew wiles really use inaccessible cardinals ???
    ... Did Andrew Wiles really use inaccessible cardinals ??? ... in other words can FLT be proved without inaccessible cardinals? ... but if the inaccessible cardinals can be avoided, they just show an analogue in other branches of math and thus no longer neccesary, perhaps not even consistant if we they wont admit the analogue. ...
    (sci.math)