Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
Math Forum
»
Discussions
»
sci.math.*
»
sci.math
Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.
Topic:
Tim Chow in Forcing for dummies
Replies:
1
Last Post:
Nov 9, 2017 5:51 AM
|
 |
|
|
|
Re: Tim Chow in Forcing for dummies
Posted:
Nov 9, 2017 5:51 AM
|
|
WM <wolfgang.mueckenheim@hs-augsburg.de> writes:
> Am Donnerstag, 9. November 2017 10:25:08 UTC+1 schrieb Alan Smaill:
>
>> >> If you want to say that is equivalent, *you* need to
>> >> justify that equivalence.
>> >
>> > On the contrary. Everybody who denies that the power set is
>> > uncountable has to show at least one subset of Z that is not a set.
>>
>> More diversionary tactics.
>>
>> Try and justify your own claim: the burden of proof is with you.
>
> Done already. Did you miss it? Here it is again: Assume there was a
> subset of Z that is not an element of the power set of Z (in the
> model) but is an element of the power set of Z (in our "universe").
>
> Contradiction,
non sequitur.
> because the axioms of ZF do not refer to models. Either
> a model satisfies all of them (and here all means all) or it is not a
> model.
Repeating the bleeding obvious that no-one has ever disputed.
> In particular there is no difference with respect to this point
> between "our universe" and any other model.
Except, of course, that there are many different models!
To remind you, you claim that *all possible combinations*
of sets appearing in |N must appear in the power set.
The axioms do not say this, you carefully avoid this question
each time you are asked to give a justification.
Try again.
Fail again.
>
> Regards, WM
--
Alan Smaill
|
|
|
|
