Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Torkel Franzen argues
Replies: 25   Last Post: May 17, 2013 3:52 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 namducnguyen Posts: 2,777 Registered: 12/13/04
Re: Torkel Franzen argues
Posted: Apr 26, 2013 1:09 PM

On 26/04/2013 10:37 AM, Herman Rubin wrote:
> On 2013-04-25, FredJeffries <fredjeffries@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 25, 8:25 am, Alan Smaill <sma...@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> Newberry <newberr...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> Torkel Franzen argues that all the axioms of ZFC are manifestly true
>>>> the logic apparatus is truth preserving therefore all is good and the
>>>> system is consistent.

>
>>> Really??
>
>>> Where did he make this claim?
>
>

>> In "The Popular Impact of Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem"
>
>> http://www.ams.org/notices/200604/fea-franzen.pdf
>
>> he says:
>
>> "we can easily, indeed trivially, prove PA consistent using
>> reasoning of a kind that mathematicians otherwise
>> use without qualms in proving theorems of
>> arithmetic. Basically, this easy consistency proof observes
>> that all theorems of PA are derived by valid
>> logical reasoning from basic principles true of the
>> natural numbers, so no contradiction is derivable in PA"

>
> Mathematicians are willing to assume PA is consistent.

Agree. For the record I've always assumed PA is consistent,
until of course if one day ones present a proof _IN_ PA
of the form (F /\ ~F).

But assumption is _not_ assertion, wouldn't you agree?

> The
> inconsistency of PA would mean that the basic principles
> of the natural numbers are inconsistent.
>
> I recommend that the discussion of the natural numbers from
> the basic principles be taught very early, and addition, etc.,
> be derived from them. They LOOK obvious. But if it is
> consistent, we know we cannot prove it.
>
> Now PA has been proved consistent in ZF or NBG, but then that
> brings the consistency of axioms for set theory.
>

--
----------------------------------------------------
There is no remainder in the mathematics of infinity.

NYOGEN SENZAKI
----------------------------------------------------

Date Subject Author
4/24/13 Newberry
4/25/13 Bill Taylor
4/25/13 Alan Smaill
4/25/13 FredJeffries@gmail.com
4/25/13 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
4/25/13 scattered
4/26/13 Herman Rubin
4/26/13 namducnguyen
4/26/13 namducnguyen
5/4/13 Frederick Williams
5/4/13 namducnguyen
5/5/13 Frederick Williams
5/8/13 Frederick Williams
5/8/13 namducnguyen
5/8/13 namducnguyen
5/15/13 Frederick Williams
5/17/13 namducnguyen
5/15/13 Frederick Williams
5/4/13 fom
5/5/13 namducnguyen
5/5/13 fom
5/5/13 namducnguyen
5/5/13 Frederick Williams
5/5/13 fom
4/26/13 fom