On 8 Dez., 10:41, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So what I'm saying here is that a > theory like ZFC is not "Essentially" about mathematics, it is not even > a piece of mathematics, it is a LOGICAL theory.
On the contrary, ZFC is a deeply unlogical theory. It requires the belief that uncountably many elements can be distinguished whereas everybody knows that this is impossible even in ideal mathematics. Further in ZFC the sequence 21., 2.1, 432.1, 43.21, 6543.21, 654.321, ... has the limit < 1. In analysis the very same sequence has the (improper)imit oo. http://planetmath.org/?op=getobj&from=objects&id=12607 If analysis is based upon ZFC then we have a contradiction. If analysis is not based upon ZFC then ZFC is irrelevant for mathematics.