Having fairly recently done a PhD in set theory, I can confirm that the independence of the continuum hypothesis has not been refuted!
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 2:50 AM Mick Collins <mickc...@mac.com> wrote: > (Try again, apologies for accidentally sending) > ... typo > When you said > " 2^AJ=A(J+1)" > > I wonder if you meant > "2^AJ >= A(J+1)" > > To many that may seem like nit-picking, but it is a NIT. However, if you > MEANT what you wrote, then it is a YUGE NIT. It would mean that someone > (Halmos?) found an extension of ZFC that trumps (sorry) Cohen's > independence of CH. Is that the case? > > > > On May 22, 2016, at 9:18 PM, Mick Collins <mickc...@mac.com> wrote: > > > > Doc Hawk, > > I'm envious that you took a course from Halmos, but I question what is > probably a typo. > > > > "Dr. Hawkins" <doch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Well, which infinity? aleph-naught (A0) is the count of the > > integers/wholes/natural > > > > A1=2^A0, the count of the reals. > > > > For that mater 2^AJ=A(J+1) > > > > A1-A0=A1 > > > > Aj^n=Aj > > > > A0 is also "countable"; A1 and higher are not. > > > > > > Yes, I really took a course on that, from the master himself (Halmos) > > > > -- Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq. > (702) 508-8462 > > > ------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode > _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode