home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!sagi.wistar.upenn.edu
- From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
- Newsgroups: sci.math
- Subject: Re: consequences of the Axiom of Choice
- Message-ID: <92147@netnews.upenn.edu>
- Date: 8 Oct 92 14:58:07 GMT
- References: <1akbpqINN8hk@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> <1992Oct5.192243.17318@guinness.idbsu.edu> <91826@netnews.upenn.edu> <1992Oct6.214824.4955@guinness.idbsu.edu>
- Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
- Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
- Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
- Lines: 11
- Nntp-Posting-Host: sagi.wistar.upenn.edu
- In-reply-to: holmes@opal.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes)
-
- In article <1992Oct6.214824.4955@guinness.idbsu.edu>, holmes@opal (Randall Holmes) writes:
- >And, alas, the prime ideal theorem is false in Solovay's model (it
- >implies the existence of non-measurable sets).
-
- I've never quite understood the philosophy behind this "alas". People
- who don't like AC usually do so because they like constructive proofs.
- Most constructive work keeps one within the realm of the measurable.
- The only exception that I know of, where knowledge and sometimes even
- use of PCA say exists, is probability.
- --
- -Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
-