/sci/ - Science & Math

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFC

>>9314763
Why do we need anything except the usual axioms we know?

>>9314786
those are the usual axioms we know though?

>>9314787
>Today ZFC is the standard form of axiomatic set theory and as such is the most common foundation of mathematics.
Maybe?

>>9314786
>Why do we need anything except the usual axioms we know?
Sometimes one wants to work within the category of all axioms

>>9314761
An inconsistent piece of garbage.

>>9314824
>he's doing it again! haha, what a madman!

>>9314824
Why is is inconsistent?

>>9314851
it's not

>>9314854
But you can't prove it is consistent. Shit theory.

>>9314882
you can't prove you exist and yet you're here shitposting

>>9314886
I think, therefore I am.

>>9314834
>>he's doing it again! haha, what a madman!
I'm not a "he".

>>9314834
>>he's doing it again! haha, what a madman!
Who are you quoting?

>>9314882
>But you can't prove it is consistent. Shit theory.
Conjectures are natural in mathematics though, might as well get used to it

>>9314882
if you could prove it's consistent, it wouldn't be.

>>9314960
>a statement not being provable
>Conjectures
Engineer spotted.

>>9316597
Why is it not provable?

>>9316603
It's not provable assuming ZFC is consistent, which is obviously false, but that's what the initial post assumed.

>>9316597
Why can't I conjecture that it's consistent?

>>9316621
A statement being provably unprovable is not the same as it being a "conjecture".

>>9316626
Well then what's wrong with it being unprovable?

>>9314761
Too weak

>>9316635
Nothing.

>>9316640
>everything is a theorem
>too weak
Huh?

>>9316640
Not that I have anything against V=L, but if you're gonna post
>too weak
one could also post
>irrelevant
to those kinds of axioms. Irrelevant for anything but people who already study set and model theory.

>>9314952
Yes you are faggot.

>>9316658
>people who already study set and model theory
People wouldn't be studying set theory.

>>9316662
does this sentence miss a piece?

>>9316667
Nope. Those who study set theory aren't really people.

>>9316660
>faggot
Why the homophobia?

>>9314952
>>9316672
>>>/r/eddit/

>>9316671
Ah, I see. Well you need to study some basic set theory at least to git gud with tensor products and such.

>>9316660
>Yes you are faggot.
Unfortunately for you, you don't get to determine by pronouns or my gender.

>>9316675
>basic set theory
That's not the kind of set theory people mean when they bring up "V = L".
>tensor products
You only need it to establish their existence, and even that is possible without using much basic set theory.

>>9316672
kek