3
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
New page: == Not really controversial anymore == Any proof which uses the axiom of choice can be transformed into a proof that doesn't. Granted, it will be a somewhat more complicated proof, but i...
== Not really controversial anymore ==
Any proof which uses the axiom of choice can be transformed into a proof that doesn't. Granted, it will be a somewhat more complicated proof, but it always works, and that's a fact. That is the reason that AC is much less controversial these days than it was, in the early 1900s.
There is a complete explanation of the process and the proof that it's reliable [http://web.unicam.it/matinf/aila/Scuola%20AILA/sulla%20varieta%20dei%20metodiAC_sem02.pdf here].
Also, the profoundly intuitive [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trichotomy_%28mathematics%29 trichotomy] is equivalent to AC, so be careful what you call controversial. [[User:BenjB|BenjB]] 20:29, 27 January 2008 (EST)
Any proof which uses the axiom of choice can be transformed into a proof that doesn't. Granted, it will be a somewhat more complicated proof, but it always works, and that's a fact. That is the reason that AC is much less controversial these days than it was, in the early 1900s.
There is a complete explanation of the process and the proof that it's reliable [http://web.unicam.it/matinf/aila/Scuola%20AILA/sulla%20varieta%20dei%20metodiAC_sem02.pdf here].
Also, the profoundly intuitive [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trichotomy_%28mathematics%29 trichotomy] is equivalent to AC, so be careful what you call controversial. [[User:BenjB|BenjB]] 20:29, 27 January 2008 (EST)