January 10th, 2015, 04:51 PM  #31 
Senior Member Joined: Dec 2014 From: Brazil Posts: 203 Thanks: 1  non axiomatic set theorem
Let's talk of implications in G be a possibilitie of existence, by subsets whith as a same property: first: thanks a your property, G,this don't have a opositive, because be a impossibilitie of existence, make no sense second: the first subset of G, be a "existence" in all senses, phisical, mathematics or material. tird: the first subset of G, don't have a opositive too, because G, don't let space for non existence, see closer, there no condition to be anything out of G, even be Â´possible think in non existence. fourt: doesn't sense in talk theory of contraries(opositives), there no more necessary, or beter, never be a existence, the contraries imply in errors not qualities. such thing never hapened. five: the new philosofy be formed only for qualities, never for errors. the true work beginin. I like thanks a friend Greathouse and Archie, I imagine so much dificulties both of you have to understand my bad english, the worst friends, I wrote bad in portuguese too. 
January 15th, 2015, 03:42 AM  #32 
Senior Member Joined: Dec 2014 From: Brazil Posts: 203 Thanks: 1  non axiomatic set theorem
GreatHouse, I can get out of Russells paradox, and so what, I need your help for verification the theorem, if is true or false. please help me. Lucio just remember, G is a set whith total subsets with a property of "possibility of existence", see , G don't pertence like element of set, but get the property of "possibility of existence", theres not contradition, because him is a set, and others elements are subsets. 
January 15th, 2015, 05:40 AM  #33 
Global Moderator Joined: Nov 2006 From: UTC 5 Posts: 16,046 Thanks: 938 Math Focus: Number theory, computational mathematics, combinatorics, FOM, symbolic logic, TCS, algorithms 
I can't understand you.

January 15th, 2015, 01:28 PM  #34 
Senior Member Joined: Dec 2014 From: Brazil Posts: 203 Thanks: 1  non axiomatic set theorem
Greathouse, I not understand you too, you help me several times, even whith my english indian. We going proof god exist, selfyourself, perfect and finite. After all possibility of existence can be atribut this god. You give up now? camon, on effort more. I beg look the proofs and the topic before. thanks again friend Lucio 
January 29th, 2015, 03:57 PM  #35 
Senior Member Joined: Dec 2014 From: Brazil Posts: 203 Thanks: 1  non axiomatic set theorem
Mayflow, Do you remember the categorys of aristoteles and Kant? In then philosofy was 13, and more in Kant. I developed a my philosofy whith seven categorys, in order decrescent: first possibilities of existence two existence tree quality four quantity five Crist six  idea seven spacetime( material word) all categorys are spheres interconected, in total of 22 dimensional space, 21 because as seven spheres in a dimension of time of material word. I going proof what a possible visualit this space. thanks again, my friend. Lucio 

Tags 
axiomatic, set, theorem 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Non euclidean axiomatic  Chri  Geometry  2  August 15th, 2014 05:38 AM 
What's wrong with this axiomatic proof?  jstarks4444  Number Theory  1  January 23rd, 2012 01:11 PM 
axiomatic definiation  learnmaths  Applied Math  0  October 30th, 2011 12:59 AM 
proof by using greens theorem or stokes theorem  george gill  Calculus  5  May 14th, 2011 02:13 PM 
Axiomatic theories  Zombi  Applied Math  3  April 3rd, 2010 05:25 PM 