
Re: A size criterion: a question
Posted:
Jan 7, 2013 2:07 PM


On 7 Jan., 08:21, Butch Malahide <fred.gal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In fact, it's consistent with ZF that there are sets x and y such that > both x > y and y = x. Also, there can be sets x and y such > that x > y and y > x.
Fine but why do you call that consistent? Oh, I see. You said consistent with ZF, i.e., you mean of same state of logic: x > y and y > x is as meaningful a theory as ZF.
Agreed.
Regards, WM

