Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- From: "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 07:12:32 -0500
Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Marshall wrote:
2) ZFC, without Infinity.
3) ZFC, with the negation of Infinity.
Is it clear why 2) and 3) are different?
Not to me. I don't know what Foo is and I don't know what ~Foo is.
Weird. You have repeatedly said that there are no infinite sets.
Now, evidently, you don't know what that means.
--
"[The author of the article] refuses to comment further. '/Nonlinear
Analysis/ editors have evaluated the paper, they accepted it for
publication and they have the copyright of its contents - and thus
they are responsible for its correctness,' she [said]."
.
- 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
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- From: Marshall
- Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Implementable Set Theory and Consistency of ZFC
- Prev by Date: Re: Equivalency between the undeciability of the halting problem and the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
- Next by Date: Re: Problem related to a linear regression
- 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
|
