MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

In question No.134351 it is asserted that there exists a Paraconsistent Set Theory in which the Continuum Hypothesis (CH) is disproved. I would like to know more about this theory, which I will call PST. Is it true that PST is formalizable in the language of first order ZF (even though its rules of inference and some of its logical axioms are different from those of ZF)? Is it also true that "not CH" is a theorem of PST but that "CH" is not a theory of PST?....If the answer to both of these questions is "yes" (and if PST has no special "ad hoc" axioms designed to disprove CH), then this seems to me to be a very noteworthy result which I had never heard about until now.

share|cite|improve this question
As an aside, I believe the paper in which PST is shown to have these properties is "Transfinite cardinals in paraconsistent set theory" by Zach Weber (…), in the 2012 Review of Symbolic Logic. – Noah Schweber Jun 21 '13 at 20:15
Thanks alot for this information. I will try to get hold of that article and hope I will be able to understand it. – Garabed Gulbenkian Jun 22 '13 at 20:20
I am currently reading Weber's paper and the gist of his proof that not-CH holds is that |omega|<|P(omega)|<|P(omega)| holds in his system of paraconsistent set theory. – Thomas Benjamin Jul 12 '13 at 8:46

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.