Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
442 bytes added ,  03:48, August 3, 2008
fixed quote
Line 31: Line 31:  
== Controversy ==
 
== Controversy ==
   −
Despite its usefulness, many mathematicians reject the Axiom of Choice. "It bothers some people because it asserts the existence of a set ... without giving enough information to determine that set uniquely (by applying a finite number of rules), and it is the ''only'' formal set-theoretical axiom which does this.  For this reason it is customary to mention the axiom of choice whenever it is used.  It need not be used if the number of sets is finite."<ref name="willard" />
+
Despite its usefulness, many mathematicians reject the Axiom of Choice. Stephen Willard, author of the textbook "General Topolog"y, wrote the following after describing the axiom of choice:
 +
 
 +
<blockquote>It is left to the reader to decide that these two statements both say the same thing. What they say is: given any collection of sets, however large, we can pick one element from each set in the collection. It bothers some people because it asserts the existence of a set (...)  without giving enough information to determine that set uniquely (by applying a finite number of rules), and it is the ''only'' formal set-theoretic axiom which does this.  For this reason it is customary to mention the axiom of choice whenever it is used.  It need not be used if the number of sets is finite.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=-o8xJQ7Ag2cC&printsec=frontcover#PPA9,M1 Page 9 of "General Topology"]</ref></blockquote>
    
The rejection of the Axiom of Choice reflects a preference for constructive [[Proof|mathematical proofs]]. AC, by its very nature, is nonconstructive, since it merely asserts that a choice function exists, but does not give an explicit method for its construction. Since the Axiom of Choice is independent of the other axioms, assuming this axiom results in a more constrained system than otherwise.  Thus results provable with it might not be provable or might not even be true, without it.
 
The rejection of the Axiom of Choice reflects a preference for constructive [[Proof|mathematical proofs]]. AC, by its very nature, is nonconstructive, since it merely asserts that a choice function exists, but does not give an explicit method for its construction. Since the Axiom of Choice is independent of the other axioms, assuming this axiom results in a more constrained system than otherwise.  Thus results provable with it might not be provable or might not even be true, without it.
296

edits

Navigation menu