Talk:Axiom of Choice Implies Zorn's Lemma

Swap proof 1 and proof 2?
I propose we swap Proof 1 and Proof 2; while Proof 1 offers a good perspective, if it the first proof somebody sees, they will be lead to believe that Zorn's lemma is much more complicated than it really is. --Joelbrennan (talk) 19:04, 19 April 2019‎


 * Well, maybe -- but Proof 1 uses elementary results and concepts that an entry-level mathematician can understand, and hence can follow. Proof 2 uses concepts that are not immediately accessible, and so if Proof 2 is the first proof somebody sees, they are likely to give up and go away, because they can't understand the language.


 * By the way, you might want to sign your posts. --prime mover (talk) 14:51, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

What happened to my edits?
I was in the process of updating my edits on this talk page when they all disappeared. Does anybody have any idea what might have happened? Is it possible that somebody else started editing this talk page while I was editing it?

I had copied my biographical information from this page to my talk page and when I came back to this page all my previous edits were gone.--DeaconJohn (talk) 01:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * The only page you actually made any edits to is this one: Talk:Axiom of Choice Implies Zorn's Lemma/Proof 1 --prime mover (talk) 07:57, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you, prime mover. Your comments and advice have already been very helpful. I am still working through them. Eventually I will come back and delete this dialog between you and me on this page.--DeaconJohn (talk) 15:34, 21 March 2021 (UTC)