Skip to content

Comment on Banach–Tarski Paradoxparent

Comments

I think it uses Cohen's forcing

You don't have to give a full proof, just an intuitive explanation of why the "obvious" arguments fail. For example, we can prove the non-emptiness of product sets for finite sets. Why can that not simply be extended in the "obvious" way to infinite sets? How can making the sets "bigger" suddenly make the product empty?

Hmm. I'll have to think more about that.

The problem I have is that "intuitive arguments" differ between people. What one person thinks is intuitively obviously true, another can think is intuitively obviously false.

I'll have to think about what I would be trying to say.

It's a good point ... it's now explicitly on my list.

Thank you.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.