The McKinsey axiom is not compact

Journal of Symbolic Logic 57 (4):1230-1238 (1992)

Authors
Abstract This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.2307/2275366
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 39,940
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

An Incomplete Logic Containing S.Kit Fine - 1974 - Theoria 40 (1):23-29.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Intentional Identity Revisited.Ahti Pietarinen - 2010 - Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 6 (2):147-188.
Canonicity for Intensional Logics Without Iterative Axioms.Timothy J. Surendonk - 1997 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 26 (4):391-409.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A Maximal Bounded Forcing Axiom.David Asperó - 2002 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 67 (1):130-142.
McKinsey-Brown Survives.Harold W. Noonan - 2000 - Analysis 60 (4):353-356.
Strong Analogues of Martin's Axiom Imply Axiom R.Robert E. Beaudoin - 1987 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 52 (1):216-218.
On Measurable Limits of Compact Cardinals.Arthur W. Apter - 1999 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 64 (4):1675-1688.
The McKinsey Axiom is Not Canonical.Robert Goldblatt - 1991 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 56 (2):554-562.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
41 ( #188,022 of 2,235,508 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
16 ( #45,373 of 2,235,508 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature