Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Majoring in Mathematics

2009-12-09T15:58:39Z

Tomkup32:

This is an extremely rough outline for this new article. I will continue to expand it over the next few weeks based on feedback about the appropriateness of the problems and other suggestions for improvements. Please let me know what you think! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:12, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
::well I was a math major in college many years ago (before Rubic's cube!) Suggest adding statistics. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:17, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
:::Ah, good idea. At my undergrad school mathematics and statistics were separate programs, but I guess this isn't typical. I'll throw in a new section. I'm not much for statistics -- can anyone suggest some good problems? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:20, 4 October 2009 (EDT)

Tremendous work, Mark. I'll try to add something for probability or statistics, which I studied.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:22, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
:Great, thanks. These are subjects in which I'm inexpert. Now I'm inclined to move Probability/Statistics to a "field" along with algebra, analysis, etc. Please add a nice problem or theorem if you have any in mind! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:24, 4 October 2009 (EDT)

Terrific analysis on what college mathematics is not. That should be required reading for many seeking to major in math!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:30, 15 October 2009 (EDT)

Why is there no mention of the bible or theology in this article? It should be mentioned, as it is in [[Axiom_of_Infinity]], that the notion of an infinite set is somewhat blasphemous. [[User:Tomkup32|Tomkup32]] 10:58, 9 December 2009 (EST)

Gödel's completeness theorem

2009-12-09T15:52:24Z

Tomkup32:

'''Gödel's completeness theorem''' was proven by [[Kurt Gödel]], which states:
<blockquote>
Any [[formula]] in first-order predicate [[calculus]] is true only if it [[sound]]s true.
</blockquote>

==Theological Implications==

The nature of The Completeness Theorem has far-reaching implications in the field of Theistic Creation. For instance, it is clear that God made the world, as only He could make first order logic complete. The soundness of the statement "God exists and is all things to all men" is proven within first-order predicates, meaning that The Completeness Theorem provides a mathematical proof for the existence and omnipotence of God. Kurt Gödel himself once claimed, "Even my surname is simply 'God,' with an added 'el' and an umlaut."<ref>http://www.godelandtheology.org/quotes/quote54.htm</ref>

[[Category:Logic]][[category: mathematics]]

Talk:Fermat's Last Theorem

2009-12-09T14:26:47Z

Tomkup32: /* Axiom of choice */

The first computer program I wrote - between high school and college - generated solutions to the Pythagorean Theorem. I guess I should have programmed it to count them, too. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 21:25, 20 December 2007 (EST)

== Axiom of choice ==

Any proof which uses the [[axiom of choice]] can be transformed into a proof that doesn't. Granted, it will be a somewhat more complicated proof, but it always works, and that's a fact. That is the reason that AC is much less controversial these days than it was, in the early 1900s.

There is a complete explanation of the process and the proof that it's reliable [http://web.unicam.it/matinf/aila/Scuola%20AILA/sulla%20varieta%20dei%20metodiAC_sem02.pdf here].

Also, the profoundly intuitive [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trichotomy_%28mathematics%29 trichotomy] is equivalent to AC, so be careful what you call controversial. [[User:BenjB|BenjB]] 20:29, 27 January 2008 (EST)

"Any proof which uses the axiom of choice can be transformed into one that doesn't"?! Lol. If C is the axiom of choice, then C (vacuously) proves C. By your assertion, that proof can be 'transformed' into a proof not using C, which means you can prove C from ZF, which is a contradiction. Really, lol. [[User:Tomkup32|Tomkup32]] 09:26, 9 December 2009 (EST)