Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- From: David C. Ullrich <dullrich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:59:15 -0500
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 01:06:59 -0700 (PDT), lwalke3@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
[...]
I wish that someone could post an alternative to ZFC
Why do you wish that? Is there some particular problem
with ZFC that you see?
(Note the question marks above...)
in a
sufficiently coherent manner, with sufficient rigor so that
no one would ask what the poster _means_ by the symbols
and terminology that he's using, and just focus on whether
the theory's consistent, and compare and contrast it with ZFC.
But until that day, this is all I have to work with! All I know is
that tommy1729 desires a theory in which the concepts of
elementhood and subsethood are unified into a single concept.
David C. Ullrich
"Understanding Godel isn't about following his formal proof.
That would make a mockery of everything Godel was up to."
(John Jones, "My talk about Godel to the post-grads."
in sci.logic.)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- From: Herman Jurjus
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- References:
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- From: amy666
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- From: MoeBlee
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- From: MoeBlee
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- From: lwalke3
- Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- Prev by Date: Re: Real world and mathematics
- Next by Date: Re: Number with radian..
- Previous by thread: Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- Next by thread: Re: tommy1729 set axioms update
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|