On Sunday, June 23, 2013 10:32:49 PM UTC+1, Peter Percival wrote: > email@example.com wrote: > > > > > Under ZFC, CH is consistent, and (not CH) is also consistent. > > > Therefore, in the view of the majority of mathematicians, it doesn't make much sense to continue to ask whether CH is "true". > > > > Why do you think that that is the view of the majority of mathematicians? > > > > Consider: if ZF is consistent then ZF + choice and ZF + not-choice are > > both consistent. Does it therefore not make much sense to ask whether > > choice is true? >
It makes no sense at all to ask whether the axiom of choice is "true." It doesn't really make sense to ask whether any axiom is true.