home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.math:17551 sci.physics:21970
- Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!charlie
- From: charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu (Charles Geyer)
- Subject: Re: Banach-Tarski (_NOT_ Re: Bayes' theorem and QM)
- Message-ID: <1992Dec31.195931.10038@news2.cis.umn.edu>
- Sender: news@news2.cis.umn.edu (Usenet News Administration)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: isles.stat.umn.edu
- Organization: School of Statistics, University of Minnesota
- References: <C03Er1.6wz@netnews.jhuapl.edu> <1992Dec30.225955.29902@news2.cis.umn.edu> <1hu8buINN8ve@gap.caltech.edu>
- Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 19:59:31 GMT
- Lines: 26
-
- In article <1hu8buINN8ve@gap.caltech.edu> allenk@ugcs.caltech.edu (Allen Knutson) writes:
- >charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu (Charles Geyer) writes, under a wholly
- >inappropriate subject line:
-
- Wow, a subject line flame. Happy holidays to you too, buddy. This subject
- line is also inappropriate. You missed the point.
-
- >>If you think that every "real world" set should be measurable, and hence
- >>Lebesgue theory is a waste of time, then you object to more of classical
- >>mathematics than just the axiom of choice.
- >
- >>Not so?
- >
- >Not so. Solovay proved in 1970 that the axiom "All subsets of the reals are
- >measurable" is consistent with ZF (obviously not with ZFC), under some
- >standard large cardinal assumption. I think I have this right... Allen K.
-
- So? Does this mean I should burn all of the measure theory texts on my
- bookshelf? The question is what kind of integration theory does that leave
- you with?
-
- --
- Charles Geyer
- School of Statistics
- University of Minnesota
- charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu
-