The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

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

Topic: Matheology � 295
Replies: 8   Last Post: Jun 28, 2013 4:43 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 8,833
Registered: 1/6/11
Re: Matheology � 295
Posted: Jun 28, 2013 3:59 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article <>, wrote:

> On Thursday, 27 June 2013 20:29:51 UTC+2, Virgil wrote:
> > Without an axiom of infinity in ZF, there is no provable |N or provable
> > aleph_0, but with that axiom, in ZF one gets both.

> No

Lets see your alleged proof, WM, of an |N in ZF without any axiom of

> One gets what we had for millenia

WM must be far older than the rest of us to have had anything for

So his WMYTHEOLOGY is probably due to senility.

: natural numbers such that everybody
> could count as far as he could. "A set" is not defined by any axiom because
> there is no definition of set. aleph_0 is about the same delusion in
> matheology as is the devil in religions.

But matheology is WM's own creation and universe, not ours, so they are
only his own devils that he has to fight, not ours.

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.