
Re: Joel David Hamkins on definable real numbers in analysis
Posted:
Jun 23, 2013 12:10 PM


On Sunday, June 23, 2013 2:15:44 AM UTC7, muec...@rz.fhaugsburg.de wrote: > On Saturday, 22 June 2013 23:38:57 UTC+2, Zeit Geist wrote: > > >>> Is that a true statement? > > > > > > Of course, if the plane is a plane. > > > > > Would that Boing or Sescna? > > > > Products from BOEING or CESSNA I would call aeroplanes. > > > > > But really, not sure what you mean. Do you mean if the plane is a Euclidean Plane? > > > > I don't know other "planes" in pure geometry. > > > > But with respect to your ulterior motive: The existence of nonEuclidean geometries is in no relation with the question whether anybody in reality can wellorder all real numbers. The answer given by Zermelo is "yes we can". And the reality is comparable with Obama's results (yes we scan). >
First, no one can just wellorder the real numbers. The fact is that given certain assumptions about the real numbers, then one can show that a well ordering of them is logical necessity. We already Know that you reject the axioms of ZFC, and that's your prerogative. However, you can say that the system of ZFC doesn't prove Te WellOrdering Principle.
Second, you can tell from my comments above, I am wondering your thoughts on NonEuclidean Geometry. Is Euclidean Geometry the absolute truth?
> > Regards, WM
ZG

