Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC

In article <58ee5$4729cc12$82a1e228$11064@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

David C. Ullrich wrote:

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 10:03:34 +0100, Han de Bruijn
<Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

MoeBlee wrote:

On Oct 31, 1:59 am, Han de Bruijn <Han.deBru...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

I will say it once more. I am typing this slowly, since I don't want
you to miss anything I say. If you have a proof in a theory
consisting of axioms (1)-(4), it is also a proof in the theory
consisting of axioms (1)-(4)+(X).

How do you "know" that? Has the Pope told you, by dogma, that it is so?

No, you royal ignoramus, it's PROVEN as a basic property of the
deductive system. It's the property of monotonicity of deduction. And
we PROVE it.

Yeah, yeah. Then why are (5-9) required in ZFC, once Infinity has become
an axiom of it? Why is e.g. Choice provable in (ZFC-Infinity) and not in
common ZFC?

This has been explained several times. If by ZFC-Infinity you mean
ZFC without the axiom of infinity then Choice is _not_ provable
in that syatem. "ZFC without the axiom of infinity" is not the
same as "ZFC plus the negation of the axiom of infinity" - choice
_is_ provable in ZFC plus the negation of the axiom of infinity.

Sure. (ZFC - Foo) is not the same as (ZFC - Foo + ~Foo). Quite clear.
Tip, hint: how can Foo be "denied" iff Foo is just plain nonsense in
the first place?

It is only in the unreliable opinion of HdB that Foo is nonsense, but
that is not the issue here, in finite set terms which even HdB can parse:

{a,b} \ {b} = {a}, but ({a,b} \ {b}) u {notb} = {a, notb}

so they are not the same.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Iteration square root of arcsinh
    ... It's clear that the axiom of Infinity ... is the only ZFC axiom which is not implementable. ... I'm not trying to call HdB a so-called "crank," nor ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Aleph One Sets
    ... [George Greene] ... beyond what can be proved in ZFC alone. ... one axiom you like best. ... When I included a rather long quote from Woodin in my last reply, ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: GCH vs. Axiom of Choice.
    ... |separation is vacuous or it has content. ... seem related to the axiom of separation? ... |insisting that the power set contains all the subsets and that all ... In the language of ZFC, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
    ... ZFC without the axiom of infinity then Choice is _not_ provable ... _is_ provable in ZFC plus the negation of the axiom of infinity. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Why Regularity?
    ... "Naive comprehension is the principle that, ... this set theory is not heading at a Russell set as ZFC does. ... I think if I add this axiom, then I will currenty that is a set ... The axiom is inconsistent all by itself. ...
    (sci.math)