Prev: How Can ZFC/PA do much of Math - it Can't Even Prove PA is Consistent (EASY PROOF)
Next: Recursively Enumerable vs. Constructively Provable
From: Aatu Koskensilta on 14 Jun 2010 11:45
Charlie-Boo <shymathguy(a)gmail.com> writes:

> Since PA can't prove something as simple as that, how could anyone be
> so stupid as to claim ZFC/PA is a good basis for all of our ordinary
> math?

Who makes this claim? You're hallucinating.

--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta(a)uta.fi)

"Wovon man nicht sprechan kann, dar�ber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: How Can ZFC/PA do much of Math - it Can't Even Prove PA is Consistent (EASY PROOF)
Next: Recursively Enumerable vs. Constructively Provable