On 3/18/2013 1:30 PM, WM wrote: > On 18 Mrz., 17:36, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: >> On 3/18/2013 6:43 AM, WM wrote: >> >>> On 18 Mrz., 07:26, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: >> >>> I prove that the axiom is nonsense like the axiom that a >>> triangle with four edges exists. >> >> You have *proven* nothing. > > Easy to assert,
Simply because of your own acts. You have neither offered a scheme of logic by which to judge your claims of proof nor will you participate using generally accepted forms.
Speaking of easy assertion...
> but not easy to believe unless you think that choosing > something does not mean choosing something. However, people who > believe in the latter are not suitable for scientific discourse. >> >>> Every axiom, beginning with Euclid, established or formalized >>> a triviality. >> >> There is nothing trivial about what makes >> Euclid's axioms different from Hilbert's. > > Don't put words in my mouth. Try to understand what I said. All > axioms, Euclid's and Hilbert's are fixing nothing but trivialities. >
I did understand what you said. My response was that the comparison of alternatives was not trivial.
> AC is fixing a triviality too. Therefore its disproof with respect to > uncountable sets disproves the possibility of uncountable sets.