Timeline for Sigma Algebra that is not a topology
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 16, 2011 at 19:23 | comment | added | Marc Palm | @Joel: Interesting, I edited the answer. | |
| Jul 12, 2011 at 17:53 | comment | added | Zev Chonoles | pm: It seems the backslashes needed to be escaped by another backslash before it would be parsed. | |
| Jul 12, 2011 at 17:51 | history | edited | Zev Chonoles | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited LaTeX
|
| Jul 12, 2011 at 17:46 | history | edited | Marc Palm | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 62 characters in body
|
| Jul 12, 2011 at 17:35 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | A small nitpick: your statement that "this [is] equivalent to the existence of non Lebesgue measurable sets," is not quite accurate, since it is consistent with ZF+DC (from suitable assumptions) that every set is Lebesgue measurable, but in these models, not every set is Borel. (For example, this situation arises under AD.) That is, knowing that there are non-Lebesgue measurable sets is not the same as knowing that there are non-Borel sets. Meanwhile, it is consistent with ZF that every set is Borel, such as when AC fails so badly that the reals are a countable union of countable sets. | |
| Jul 12, 2011 at 17:28 | comment | added | Marc Palm | How to render the brackets correctly? | |
| Jul 12, 2011 at 17:25 | history | answered | Marc Palm | CC BY-SA 3.0 |