Graduate studies at Western
Studia Logica 79 (3):357 - 372 (2005)
|Abstract||Andrzej Kisielewicz has proposed three systems of double extension set theory of which we have shown two to be inconsistent in an earlier paper. Kisielewicz presented an argument that the remaining system interprets ZF, which is defective: it actually shows that the surviving possibly consistent system of double extension set theory interprets ZF with Separation and Comprehension restricted to 0 formulas. We show that this system does interpret ZF, using an analysis of the structure of the ordinals.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Steven Buechler (1991). Pseudoprojective Strongly Minimal Sets Are Locally Projective. Journal of Symbolic Logic 56 (4):1184-1194.
John E. Hutchinson (1976). Order Types of Ordinals in Models of Set Theory. Journal of Symbolic Logic 41 (2):489-502.
Daniel W. Cunningham (2010). A Covering Lemma for HOD of K (ℝ). Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (4):427-442.
Matt Kaufmann (1983). Blunt and Topless End Extensions of Models of Set Theory. Journal of Symbolic Logic 48 (4):1053-1073.
Ali Enayat (2001). Power-Like Models of Set Theory. Journal of Symbolic Logic 66 (4):1766-1782.
John E. Hutchinson (1976). Elementary Extensions of Countable Models of Set Theory. Journal of Symbolic Logic 41 (1):139-145.
Keith Daynes (1989). Sets as Singularities in the Intensional Universe. Studia Logica 48 (1):111 - 128.
Andrzej Kisielewicz (1998). A Very Strong Set Theory? Studia Logica 61 (2):171-178.
Masaru Shirahata (1996). A Linear Conservative Extension of Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory. Studia Logica 56 (3):361 - 392.
M. Randall Holmes (2004). Paradoxes in Double Extension Set Theories. Studia Logica 77 (1):41 - 57.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads2 ( #246,863 of 741,003 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?