
Re: Matheology S 224
Posted:
Apr 20, 2013 11:13 AM


On 20/04/2013 4:25 AM, Alan Smaill wrote: > Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> writes: > >> Nam Nguyen wrote: >>> >>> On 19/04/2013 5:55 AM, Frederick Williams wrote: >>>> Nam Nguyen wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 18/04/2013 7:19 AM, Frederick Williams wrote: >> >>> >>>> >>>>>> Also, as I remarked elsewhere, "x e S' /\ Ay[ y e S' > y e S]" doesn't >>>>>> express "x is in a nonempty subset of S". >>>>> >>>>> Why? >>>> >>>> It says that x is in S' and S' is a subset of S. >>> >>> How does that contradict that it would express "x is in a nonempty >>> subset of S", in this context where we'd borrow the expressibility >>> of L(ZF) as much as we could, as I had alluded before? >> >> You really are plumbing the depths. To express that x is nonempty you >> have to say that something is in x, not that x is in something. > > but the claim was that x *is in* a nonempty set  > in this case S', which is nonempty, since x is an element of S', > and S' is a subset of S. > > (Much though it would be good for Nam to realise that > some background set theory axioms would be kind of useful here) >
Not important, just curious: Why would you think I didn't have some of those backgrounds (about set theory axioms)?
  There is no remainder in the mathematics of infinity.
NYOGEN SENZAKI 

