Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Mathematics as a language
Replies: 35   Last Post: Nov 8, 2010 1:53 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
herb z

Posts: 1,187
Registered: 8/26/06
Re: Mathematics as a language
Posted: Nov 6, 2010 2:03 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply



Herman Jurjus wrote:
> Marshall wrote:
> > herbzet wrote:
> >> Herman Jurjus wrote:
> >>> Marshall wrote:
> >>>> Herman Jurjus wrote:
> >>>>> herbzet wrote:
> >>>>>> Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> >>>>>>> herbzet writes:
> >>>>>>>> Bill Taylor wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>>>> Or whether the number 6 really exists. Does it?
> >>
> >>>>>>>> It *could* exist -- therefore, mathematically, it *does* exist.
> >>
> >>>>>>> This is a traditional and appealing idea. But just what is meant by
> >>>>>>> "could" here? What sort of possibility is involved?

> >>
> >>>>>> For rhetorical punch, I purposely left out the modifier, which is "logical".
> >>
> >>>>>> What logically could exist -- that is, what is not inherently self-
> >>>>>> contradictory -- has mathematical existence.

> >>
> >>>>> Corollary: CH is false.
> >>>>> Proof: Since Cohen 1963 we know that it is logically consistent to
> >>>>> assume that there exists S, subset of P(N), equipollent neither to N nor
> >>>>> to P(N).

> >>
> >>>> Consistent with what? In what theory?
> >>
> >>> Co-consistent with ordinary mathematics, of course.
> >>> (I.e. with ZFC, and then also with any weaker theory.)

> >>
> >> Right -- the assumption here is that ordinary mathematics
> >> (i.e. ZFC, more or less) is itself consistent -- the ordinary
> >> and unremarkable gentleman's agreement.

> >
> > Ok. But again, all the "counterexamples" just amount to saying
> > that (most) theories have undecidable sentences, right?

>
> It may be the case that the remark 'most theories have undecidable
> sentences' is used early on in the argument, but it's not the crux of
> what's being said.
>
> Here's the same argument in terms of 'real' mathematics:
>
> If you start a paper or discourse with
> "Let S be an uncountable subset of P(N), not equipollent to P(N)" (*)
> and you proceed from there, then, as long as you stick to ordinary
> mathematics, you'll never reach a contradiction (unless the ordinary
> mathematics that you use is in itself already inconsistent).
>
> So, if mere absence of contradiction (using ordinary mathematical
> reasoning alone) is argument enough for mathematical existence, then you
> would be compelled to accept the mathematical existence of S, similar to
> that of the object '6'.


I guess the problem people are having with my thesis is that they
are willing to accept (a) the mathematical existence of S, similar
to that of the object 6, and they are willing to accept (b) the
mathematical existence of a bijection f from w_1 to P(N), similar
to that of the object 6, but they are not willing to accept both
(a) and (b), because the object 6 is special -- it really and truly
exists in some sense, and that property of really existing cannot be
shared by contradictory objects like S and f.

One thinks of sets as collections of objects, and one supposes
that the collection P(N) either has an uncountable subset S not
equipollent to P(N), or it doesn't -- there's a fact of the
matter about collections of objects. One of the objects S or
f has an existence at least as factual as that of the object 6,
and the other doesn't -- though the other may enjoy some sort
of hypothetical existence, not as real as the object 6.

I'm thinking that this is the reason for the caviling about
the mathematical existence of logically possible objects:
some mathematical objects are accepted as really existing
in some sense -- they compose the actual mathematical universe.

Whereas, though we may reason about hypothetical, logically
possible, but non-existent objects, they are not part of the
actual mathematical universe; not like integers and real numbers,
quaternions and the square root of -1, and so on. And sets.

--
hz

> (*) And likewise, of course, with
> "Let f be a bijection from w_1 to P(N)"



Date Subject Author
11/2/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Aatu Koskensilta
11/3/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/3/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Herman Jurjus
11/3/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Marshall
11/3/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Herman Jurjus
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Marshall
11/5/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/5/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Herman Jurjus
11/6/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/6/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
James Dolan
11/6/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Tim Little
11/6/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Daryl McCullough
11/6/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Marshall
11/6/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Brian Chandler
11/6/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Tim Little
11/7/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
lwalke3@lausd.net
11/8/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Brian Chandler
11/7/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/7/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Daryl McCullough
11/8/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/3/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
lwalke3@lausd.net
11/3/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Marshall
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/3/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Daryl McCullough
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Bill Taylor
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Daryl McCullough
11/5/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Daryl McCullough
11/5/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
herb z
11/5/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
Daryl McCullough
11/4/10
Read Re: Mathematics as a language
VK

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.