We prove that any 1-closed (see def 1.1) model of the Π 2 consequences of PA satisfies ¬Cons PA which gives a proof of the second Godel incompleteness theorem without the use of the Godel diagonal lemma. We prove a few other theorems by the same method.

We prove that the Gödel incompleteness theorem holds for a weak arithmetic T = IΔ0 + Ω2 in the form where Cons H (T) is an arithmetic formula expressing the consistency of T with respect to the Herbrand notion of provability.

We prove that the standard cut is definable in each existentially closed model ofIΔ0+ exp by a (parameter free) П1–formula. This definition is optimal with respect to quantifier complexity and allows us to improve some previously known results on existentially closed models of fragments of arithmetic.

We formulate a Π1 sentence τ which is a version of the Tableau consistency of GlΔ0. The sentence τ is true and is provable in GlΔ0 + exp. We construct a model M of GlΔ0+Ω1+τ+BGs1 which has no proper end-extension to a model of GlΔ0+Ω1+τ. Also we prove that GlΔ0+Ω1+τ is not Π1 conservative over GlΔ0+τ.

We prove that: • if there is a model of I∆₀ + ¬ exp with cofinal Σ₁-definable elements and a Σ₁ truth definition for Σ₁ sentences, then I∆₀ + ¬ exp +¬BΣ₁ is consistent, • there is a model of I∆₀ Ω₁ + ¬ exp with cofinal Σ₁-definable elements, both a Σ₂ and a ∏₂ truth definition for Σ₁ sentences, and for each n > 2, a Σ n truth definition for Σ n sentences. The latter result is obtained by (...) constructing a model with a recursive truth-preserving translation of Σ₁ sentences into boolean combinations of $\exists \sum {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} h \\ 0 \\ \end{array} } $ sentences. We also present an old but previously unpublished proof of the consistency of I∆₀ + ¬ exp + ¬BΣ₁ under the assumption that the size parameter in Lessan's ∆₀ universal formula is optimal. We then discuss a possible reason why proving the consistency of I∆₀ + ¬ exp + ¬BΣ₁ unconditionally has turned out to be so difficult. (shrink)

We show that for each n ≥ 1, if T2n does not prove the weak pigeonhole principle for Σbn functions, then the collection scheme B Σ1 is not finitely axiomatizable over T2n. The same result holds with Sn2 in place of T 2n.

For a fixed q  ℕ and a given Σ1 definition φ(d,x), where d is a parameter, we construct a model M of 1 Δ0 + ¬ exp and a non standard d  M such that in M either φ has no witness smaller than d or phgr; is equivalent to a formula ϕ(d,x) having no more than q alternations of blocks of quantifiers.

For any n, we construct a model of in which each formula is equivalent to an formula.