Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- From: "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 06:01:44 -0400
Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Yes. I've used _only_ Extensionality, Empty set, Pairing and
Union. Then it follows I can make _any_ (finite) set with these. The
other axioms do _not_ add any constructive power to this. Therefore
I conclude they must be theorems, instead of axioms. As long as the
theory is _constructive_, i.e. without the axiom of Infinity.
Okay, so you don't know what "theorem" means. We get it.
--
"Quincy, would you rather do epistemology or conceptual analysis?"
"You know what? I'd rather fight on an aircraft carrier.... And Mama
and Baba (Papa) would fight on an aircraft carrier, too."
-- Quincy P. Hughes, age 3 1/2
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- References:
- Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- Prev by Date: Re: blow-up rate of pde
- Next by Date: Re: Primitive polynomials over GF(2^m)
- Previous by thread: Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- Next by thread: Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|