Re: Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- From: Bjarne <no@xxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:54:10 +0200
It's not a difficult exercise to show you can derive each from the
other.
Thanks, but I'm interested in what Gödel did? How did he use the
assumption that "ZF is consistent". I first thought that he used it
to claim the existence of some model and then constructed L as a
restriction of this model. But I might be wrong here?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- From: Rupert
- Re: Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- References:
- Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- From: Bjarne
- Re: Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
- Re: Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- From: Bjarne
- Re: Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- From: MoeBlee
- Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- Prev by Date: tennis shoes suppliers max 360 wholesale
- Next by Date: Re: Minimal logic valid?
- Previous by thread: Re: Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- Next by thread: Re: Confusion about gödels proof for con(ZF+CH)
- Index(es):