One reason why the negation of the axiom of choice is trueAs part of a complicatedtheory about a singularity, I wrote tentativelythe following :We apply set theory with urelements ZFU to physicalspace of elementary particles;we consider locations as urelements, elements of U,in number infinite. Ui is a subsetof U with number of elements n. XiUi is the infinitecartesian product and a set of paths.Let us consider the set of paths of all elementaryparticles-locations which number is n.If n is greater than m in CC(2 through m),countable choice for k elements sets k=2through m, the set of paths will be the void set.So, after an infinite time, physicalspace would become void, the universe wouldcollapse and a Big Crunch would happen.The matter would have to go somewhere and indeedthe Big Bang happened. So, n is indeedgreater than m. Let us notice that physicalspace is infinite. It's rather complicatedbut what do you think ? Isn't it most likely thatthe negation of the axiom of choice is true ?It is like the non-euclidian geometry whichis known in physics as true.Regards, Adib Ben Jebara.This text was not accepted in the FOM mailing list (leapsin reasoning, they say).When applying the negation of the axiom of choice (the negation is true ) there aretwo lines of work :-applying to philosophy-applying to physicsPLEASE, choose an itemamong the list (of titles, please click on one then return) inhttp://jebara.topcities.comand send a comment.And sorry if any disturbance (if you are a member of bothFOM list and ASL list, you might receive such a message twice).Regards,Adib Ben Jebara.
