Re: Weird problem
- From: Torkel Franzen <torkel@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 15 Aug 2005 13:11:21 +0200
"Keith Ramsay" <kramsay@xxxxxxx> writes:
> I was a little curious about the Shoenfield book, however,
> since the result is in an essay on predicativity. Does
> anybody happen to know what Shoenfield had to say about
> predicativity?
Not a great deal. He makes some general remarks about predicativity
and then states that "analytical sets whose definitions require only
two function quantifiers are constructible, and hence predicative in a
weak sense". The proof that he gives of his absoluteness lemma is (of
course!) concise, but far from self-contained.
.
- References:
- Re: Weird problem
- From: Keith Ramsay
- Re: Weird problem
- From: Torkel Franzen
- Re: Weird problem
- From: Keith Ramsay
- Re: Weird problem
- Prev by Date: Re: Branching quantifiers.
- Next by Date: Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- Previous by thread: Re: Weird problem
- Next by thread: Re: Obections to Cantor's Theory (Wikipedia article)
- Index(es):