/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12255094
The whole point of my paper was to prove that the field axioms are not isomorphic to the original axiomatic scheme. It's you who doesn't understand, shitcunt, or more likely you understand perfectly well and are pretending not to.

>NOT isomorphic to that defined by traditional axiomatizations
The whole point of my paper was to show that the modern stuff like the field axioms and Dedekind cuts is NOT isomorphic to the traditional axioms. Are you being retarded on purpose?