Religion

stone space

(6,498 posts)

36. That wasn't the question.

Thu Feb 26, 2015, 05:18 PM

Feb 2015

My question was whether or not the assumptions made by Wiles in the proof are consistent.

He assumes the existence of a Proper Class of strongly inaccessible cardinal numbers.

This is a statement known to be unprovable in standard set theories such as ZFC.

Now, you claim that you can just "see it".

And that seeing it is as easy as seeing that 2+2=4.

But I can prove that 2+2=4 in ZFC.

Hell, I can prove that 2+2=4 in Robinson's Q. That's how trivial the statement is.

I'm not discounting your "vision".

But a proof of your assertion within some standard set theory like ZFC would be nice. (Particularly nice in this case, since it would mean that ZFC is inconsistent and would bring mathematics as we know it to its knees.)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

46 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can Science and Mathematics coexist? [View all] stone space Feb 2015 OP

Considering that math is the language of science... DetlefK Feb 2015 #1

Mistitled, a little dated Android3.14 Feb 2015 #2

In addition, I can't for the life of me figure out the connection to religion. cbayer Feb 2015 #3

Not religion per say, but some do... stone space Feb 2015 #9

We often discuss the conflict (or lack thereof) between belief cbayer Feb 2015 #10

Given point (3) in the article, ... stone space Feb 2015 #12

So you are saying that math relies on belief? cbayer Feb 2015 #13

I like the description of mathematics as... stone space Feb 2015 #14

I think it's about hostility in both directions. cbayer Feb 2015 #16

"Atheist fundamentalists think religion is trying to destroy science." trotsky Feb 2015 #19

No, Agnostics think it too. Dont call me Shirley Feb 2015 #26

I think... gcomeau Feb 2015 #20

Do you believe in Fermat's Last Theorem? (nt) stone space Feb 2015 #21

The question makes no sense. gcomeau Feb 2015 #22

Very odd that someone who skepticscott Feb 2015 #23

Ok, I'll rephrase it. stone space Feb 2015 #25

Sigh. gcomeau Feb 2015 #29

How? stone space Feb 2015 #30

The same way I can see 2+2 =4. gcomeau Feb 2015 #31

Divine revelation, perhaps? stone space Feb 2015 #32

Doing. The. Freaking. Math. gcomeau Feb 2015 #33

You are the one claiming... stone space Feb 2015 #34

I simply pointed out the proof existed. gcomeau Feb 2015 #35

That wasn't the question. stone space Feb 2015 #36

If. You. Want. To. Dispute. The. Proof. Do. The. Work. gcomeau Feb 2015 #37

How can I dispute your work? stone space Feb 2015 #38

I didn't write the proof you linked. And now you're *really* playing dumb. -eom gcomeau Feb 2015 #39

I didn't link to a proof. stone space Feb 2015 #41

Allow me to translate gcomeau's responses okasha Feb 2015 #42

Nice try, but gcomeau had it pretty well nailed in post 29 skepticscott Feb 2015 #45

I think they can coexist quite well. stone space Feb 2015 #4

It's a silly question Android3.14 Feb 2015 #5

Thus, goats. trotsky Feb 2015 #6

Congrats. You're seeing what everyone else sees, too. cleanhippie Feb 2015 #7

I feel fairly certain that you are trying to make a point here that cbayer Feb 2015 #8

My math is limited. okasha Feb 2015 #43

As the thread has evolved, I have gotten a somewhat better understanding cbayer Feb 2015 #46

You copied the title from the OP, right? stone space Feb 2015 #11

Oh, bother edhopper Feb 2015 #15

Ah, that's my childhood alter-ego. cbayer Feb 2015 #18

I'm guessing you enjoyed Anathem. AtheistCrusader Feb 2015 #17

Math is fundamental to much of science (no pun intended). Don't see the connection w/ religion here. pinto Feb 2015 #24

Math and Science are the inextricably bound together. Agnosticsherbet Feb 2015 #27

Somehow, I suspect that science would weather the storm. stone space Feb 2015 #44

I refuse to believe in 'imaginary numbers' until someone can proove they are real... n/t PoliticAverse Feb 2015 #28

Oh, jeezus. Iggo Feb 2015 #40