Journal of Symbolic Logic 53 (2):597-602 (1988)
|Abstract||We prove a theorem (1.7) about partial orders which can be viewed as a version of the Barwise compactness theorem which does not mention logic. The Barwise compactness theorem is easily equivalent to 1.7 + "Every Henkin set has a model". We then make the observation that 1.7 gives us the definability of forcing for quantifier-free sentences in the forcing language and use this to give a direct proof of the truth and definability lemmas of forcing|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Victor Harnik & Michael Makkai (1976). Applications of Vaught Sentences and the Covering Theorem. Journal of Symbolic Logic 41 (1):171-187.
Walter A. Carnielli (1987). Systematization of Finite Many-Valued Logics Through the Method of Tableaux. Journal of Symbolic Logic 52 (2):473-493.
Michael Scanlan (1983). On Finding Compactness in Aristotle. History and Philosophy of Logic 4 (1&2):1-8.
Jon Barwise (1968). Implicit Definability and Compactness in Infinitary Languages. Lecture Notes in Mathematics 72:1--35.
Gillman Payette & Blaine D'Entremont (2006). Level Compactness. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 47 (4):545-555.
Alexander Paseau (2011). Proofs of the Compactness Theorem. History and Philosophy of Logic 31 (1):73-98.
Itamar Pitowsky (2004). Generalizations of Kochen and Specker's Theorem and the Effectiveness of Gleason's Theorem. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 35 (2):177-194.
Ehud Hrushovski & Itamar Pitowsky (2004). Generalizations of Kochen and Specker's Theorem and the Effectiveness of Gleason's Theorem. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 35 (2):177-194.
Isidore Fleischer & Philip Scott (1991). An Algebraic Treatment of the Barwise Compactness Theory. Studia Logica 50 (2):217 - 223.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #178,844 of 549,694 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 549,694 )
How can I increase my downloads?