Re: continuum hypothesis and 0=1
- From: Pierre-Yves.Gaillard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 1 Mar 2007 23:54:23 -0800
Thanks!!! By the way I have another question:
On page 45 of Cohen's book one reads
"GENERALIZED INCOMPLETENESS THEOREM. Let S be a formal system whose
axioms are given by some recursive rule. If S is consistent, and the
p.r. functions can be imbedded in S, then Consis S cannot be proved in
S."
And at the bottom of the same page:
"The requirement that the axioms be given recursively is essential;
otherwise we could take for S the set of all true statements of Z_1."
I naively thought that a statement was considered to be true if it
could be derived from the axioms.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: continuum hypothesis and 0=1
- From: Rupert
- Re: continuum hypothesis and 0=1
- References:
- Re: continuum hypothesis and 0=1
- From: Pierre-Yves . Gaillard
- Re: continuum hypothesis and 0=1
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
- Re: continuum hypothesis and 0=1
- Prev by Date: Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- Next by Date: Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- Previous by thread: Re: continuum hypothesis and 0=1
- Next by thread: Re: continuum hypothesis and 0=1
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|