É, depois de ler a parte sobre o tempo eu desisti do Kiselev. Abraço Rodrigo
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Joao Marcos <botoc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Pois o homem acabou de mandar uma mensagem "muito profunda" (e, na > minha opinião, até divertida) para a f.o.m. sobre este assunto. Basta > agora traduzir da língua que ele usa para alguma que possa ser > processada por humanos! (Talvez usando peixinhos Babel, ou aquela > maquineta do filme Marte Ataca?) > > http://www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2011-October/015931.html > > "Now some comments on the situation should be stated. The common > opinion is that inaccessibles do exist in the Set Theory which is > sufficiently adequate. And it is really have to be so, because the > faith in inaccessibles existence is the most ingenious attainment of > the mankind and it contains the greatest moments of truth (God himself > is really the best inaccessible cardinal). So, the principle of > inaccessible cardinals existence must not be destroyed by no means. > Therefore the nonexistence of inaccessible cardinals within ZF and > other affined theories (and, more widely, within contemporary Set > Theory) confirms: not the inaccessible cardinals nonexistence is > fallacious, but the theory ZF itself is nonadequate. And the > nonexistence of inaccessibles should be treated as the "external > inconsistence" of this theory itself. > - Therefore this theory should be confined in its applications, and it > should be corrected. This correction should lie in the implementation > in this theory the notion of inaccessible > existence. It seems natural, that it should be done by means of the > following: the Time > phenomenon -- that very notion, of which Set Theory was deprived many > centuries, > that already became absolute in all mathematical world -- should be > redeemed bbackward in mathematics. The way out of this crisis should > lie in the backward implementation the time phenomenon in the body of > the Set Theory, and the more valuable it will be done the better. > Maybe, it should be done in fields of ultraintuitionism of > Yessenin-Volpin, or of Vopenka (these theories are the most > appropriate for this purpose, as it seems), maybe in the way of > Nonstandard Mathematics, and so on." > > JM > > 2011/10/21 Rodrigo Freire <freires...@gmail.com>: > > Não, do jeito que está aquele "outline" não é para levar a sério. A > > impressão que fica é que ele cortou e colou uns pedaços do texto maior > sem > > se preocupar com a coerência. Aí ficou daquele jeito: tem uns três > objetos > > denotados por \chi na mesma página. > > > > Justamente nesse tipo de assunto em que é preciso ser cuidadoso. Há > vários > > argumentos errados para a inconsistência de ZF em que o erro é sutil. > Esse > > tipo de coisa tem que ser formulada precisamente, é fácil errar. > > > > Abraço > > Rodrigo > > -- > http://sequiturquodlibet.googlepages.com/ > _______________________________________________ Logica-l mailing list Logica-l@dimap.ufrn.br http://www.dimap.ufrn.br/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/logica-l
