"If you are a good economist, a virtuous economist, you are reborn as a physicist. But if you are an evil, wicked economist, you are reborn as a sociologist."
@0celo7 Let $\kappa$ be a strongly inaccessible cardinal; $V_\kappa$ the corresponding von Neumann universe. Then $V_\kappa\vDash ZFC$, i.e. $V_\kappa$ is a model of ZFC. Therefore ZFC is consistent by Gödel's completeness theorem, but not maximally consistent by Gödel's incompleteness theorem.
ok, this is a lot easier than numerical analysis! In fact, I found most abstract algebra pretty striaght forward once you know the rules, since in some way the rules can be treated one step at a time
In mathematics, Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, named after mathematicians Ernst Zermelo and Abraham Fraenkel, is one of several axiomatic systems that were proposed in the early twentieth century to formulate a theory of sets free of paradoxes such as Russell's paradox. Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the historically controversial axiom of choice included is commonly abbreviated ZFC, where C stands for choice (Ciesielski 1997). Many authors use ZF to refer to the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice excluded. Today ZFC is the standard form of axiomatic set theory and as...
Again. Time travel may be science fiction. CTCs are mainstream research, and are a valuable part of GR research. Derailing a discussion of mainstream CTCs with "time travel is science fiction" is not okay
@ACuriousMind : What is the equivalent to the axiom of comprehension in that list
Axiom of Extensionality ax-ext |- (A.z(z e. x <-> z e. y) -> x = y) Axiom of Replacement ax-rep |- (A.wE.yA.z(A.yph -> z = y) -> E.yA.z(z e. y <-> E.w(w e. x /\ A.yph))) Axiom of Power Sets ax-pow |- E.yA.z(A.w(w e. z -> w e. x) -> z e. y) Axiom of Union ax-un |- E.yA.z(E.w(z e. w /\ w e. x) -> z e. y) Axiom of Regularity ax-reg |- (E.y y e. x -> E.y(y e. x /\ A.z(z e. y -> -. z e. x))) Axiom of Infinity ax-inf |- E.y(x e. y /\ A.z(z e. y -> E.w(z e. w /\ w e. y))) Axiom of Choice ax-ac |- E.yA.zA.w((z e. w /\ w e. x) -> E.vA.u(E.t((u e. w /\ w e. t) /\ (u e. t /\ t e. y)) <->…
And ... really? Citing a discovery.com article? Pop articles are never known for scientific accuracy, they love to make broad sensationalistic claims based off of humbler claims in journals.
@ManishEarth What is your full background on CTCs?
I am a time travel science freak and I would like to follow more closely on time travel researches in mainstream physics. which journal most commonly report abotu theoretical and experimental researches on time travel topics?
Recently I heard about quanutm postselection on resolving the grandfather paradox. What's your comment on that?
"Many developments of set theory distinguish the uses of Replacement from uses the weaker axioms of Separation axsep 3686, Null Set axnul 3695, and Pairing axpr 3755, all of which we derive from Replacement"
As far as I can make out, the quantum part of the Chronology Protection Conjecture hinges on the fact that in curved space, in the semiclassical approximation, the stress energy tensor contains a term
\begin{equation}
\lim_{x\rightarrow y}\sum_{\gamma \neq \gamma_0} \frac{\sqrt{\Delta_\gamma (x...
@ACuriousMind Correction: it is the axiom of infinity plus axiom schema of separation that gives the existence of the empty set. Still it is not clear if that list is complete or not...
In set theory and its applications throughout mathematics, a class is a collection of sets (or sometimes other mathematical objects) that can be unambiguously defined by a property that all its members share. The precise definition of "class" depends on foundational context. In work on Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, the notion of class is informal, whereas other set theories, such as Von Neumann–Bernays–Gödel set theory, axiomatize the notion of "proper class", e.g., as entities that are not members of another entity.
A class that is not a set (informally in Zermelo–Fraenkel) is called a proper class...
@ManishEarth : answering a time travel question with a reasoned explanation of why it's not possible, backed by robust references including Einstein and Gödel is OK. Trying to censor such a contribution on specious that's not mainstream grounds is not OK. I gave you your journal reference which said ”outside science fiction, time travel is impossible”. PRL is mainstream. Get used to it.
@Slereah : sigh : curved space. And there's somebody else who doesn't understand the first thing about general relativity. That curved spacetime is not curved space. Or that spacetime is not the same as space. Or that there's no motion in spacetime. So you can't travel round a CTC.
@xnor Assuming you're still around, you did figure out that, from the perspective of B, the light reaches the "minus" pole simultaneous with the original light flashing at A, right?