Reputation
11,201
Top tag
Next privilege 15,000 Rep.
Protect questions
Badges
3 26 86
Impact
~160k people reached

1d
comment Rational power Napier number
I suspect the OP means to write "$e^2$," not "$2^e$"; the former is a reasonable problem, the latter (I think) is open. Also, I think "neipper" should be "(John) Napier." Regardless, without further context this isn't appropriate for mathoverflow, and even with further context it probably isn't.
2d
comment Henkin semantics for Second-order Logic
@EmilJeřábek I thought the comprehension requirement for Henkin models was just for parameters from the object sort. Whoops.
2d
revised Henkin semantics for Second-order Logic
added 27 characters in body
2d
answered Henkin semantics for Second-order Logic
Apr
30
comment Volume and Surface Area Algebra Rational Functions
But note that if you do ask this on math.stackexchange, you need to put some more effort into it: what have you tried? Where did you get stuck? If you just ask people to do your homework for you, the question will quickly be closed.
Apr
22
comment A way to smooth out the log* function?
Why the computability-theory tag?
Apr
14
comment Must $L_\alpha$ be correct about well-foundedness?
@KamerynWilliams Quite right, fixed (I was thinking about nonstandard models :P)
Apr
14
revised Must $L_\alpha$ be correct about well-foundedness?
deleted 198 characters in body
Apr
13
revised Must $L_\alpha$ be correct about well-foundedness?
added 240 characters in body
Apr
13
comment Must $L_\alpha$ be correct about well-foundedness?
@KamerynWilliams See my edits. The answer is still yes - the key fact being that we can always construct Harrison-type orders "relative" to any admissible set.
Apr
13
revised Must $L_\alpha$ be correct about well-foundedness?
added 488 characters in body
Apr
13
revised Must $L_\alpha$ be correct about well-foundedness?
added 210 characters in body
Apr
13
answered Must $L_\alpha$ be correct about well-foundedness?
Apr
6
revised When do wide initial segments ruin admissibility?
added 635 characters in body
Apr
6
asked When do wide initial segments ruin admissibility?
Apr
4
accepted Levels of L resembling each other, take 2
Apr
4
comment Levels of L resembling each other, take 2
Yes, please do - I'll accept it.
Apr
4
comment Levels of L resembling each other, take 2
@JoelDavidHamkins Ah, lovely - thanks!
Apr
4
comment Levels of L resembling each other, take 2
@YizhengZhu Ah, I missed your comment to the same effect on my previous question. I don't see either piece immediately, though: why is $L_\mu$ pointwise definable, and why is no point in $E_\kappa^+$ pointwise definable? (This may be obvious, constructibility is not my forte.)
Apr
4
comment Fine structure question: when do levels of $L$ look “a lot” like each other?
This is a great answer - unfortunately, I stated my own question wrong (see my edit and linked new question). This argument does not apply to the correct version; is there a way to modify it to still show that $E_\kappa^+$, correctly defined, is strictly smaller than $E_\kappa$?