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

Topic: Cantor's argument and the Potential Infinite.
Replies: 17   Last Post: Nov 17, 2012 10:59 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 3,612
From: London
Registered: 2/8/08
Re: Cantor's argument and the Potential Infinite.
Posted: Nov 16, 2012 4:40 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

"Uirgil" <uirgil@uirgil.ur> wrote in message
> In article <k850hm$a03$2@dont-email.me>,
> "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> wrote:

>> "Uirgil" <uirgil@uirgil.ur> wrote in message
>> news:uirgil-981B6A.02055216112012@BIGNEWS.USENETMONSTER.COM...


>> > ZFC offers a standard set theory in which actually infinite sets are
>> > not
>> > only allowed but actually required to exist, and no one yet has been
>> > able to show that ZFC is not a perfectly sound set theory.

>> That is only because you are so incoherent as to insist to call N an
>> actual
>> infinity.

> In ZFC, the N is an actually infinite set. So until you can show that
> ZFC is internally inconsistent, which no one has yet done, we have
> actual infinities in ZFC.

That's interesting: would you be so kind to show me how/why, technically
although informal as it needs be, N is an "actual infinity" in ZFC?


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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum 1994-2015. All Rights Reserved.