Description:
Logic -- math, philosophy & computational aspects.
|
|
|
Dense Linear Ordering problems.
|
| |
I have two clusters of questions. Conjecture 1: ========== Any countable dense linear ordering with no end-points is order-isomorphic to any other. This is easily proved with AC, is that right? In fact, it only needs DC, is that right? But CC is not sufficient, is that right? (I'd guess this is hard.)... more »
|
|
|
~~~~~TEst Bank and Solution manuals
|
| |
Comprehensive Test Banks and solution manuals Email me at allsolutionmanuals11[at]gmail. com if you need to buy any test bank or solution manual listed below. All emails will be answered quickly. Or visit [link] for a latest list of resources. 2009 Corporate, Partnership, Estate and Gift Taxation - James Pratt... more »
|
|
|
Another AC anomaly?
|
| |
Has anyone seen this before? [link] I'm not sure yet what to conclude from it; that AC is horribly wrong, or that WM is horribly right, or something else altogether. In short the story goes like this: A game is played, in which infinitely many coins are tossed, and there's... more »
|
|
|
A new definition of Cardinality.
|
| |
Hi all, As far as I know, all the definitions of cardinality are limited in a way or another, lets take them one after the other: 1) Von Neumann's Cardinals: A cardinal is the least of all equinumerous ordinals. 2) Frege-Russell Cardinals: A cardinal is an equivalence class of sets under equivalence relation... more »
|
|
|
Solutions Manual and Test Bank
|
| |
We are studentservice team; we have collected solutions manual and test banks for many titles of different subjects. Here under is a small portion of our collection of solutions manual and test bank. if u need anything u can contact us by email service4students(at)hotmail(do t)com do send us email if u need your requests at a cheap price and prompt... more »
|
|
|
Q about Suppes Axiomatic Set Theory
|
| |
This question refers to Definition 3, Section 5.1[1]. The definition reads: A is complete if and only if every member of A is a subset of A. He does not express it in his formal language, explaining why For every x if x \in A then x \subseteq A won't do. So how would one express the definition of 'complete'... more »
|
|
|
|
