Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Oct 25, 2023 at 23:43 comment added Piotr Hajlasz Perhaps this post is relevant: mathoverflow.net/q/354551/121665.
S Oct 25, 2023 at 23:01 history suggested The Amplitwist CC BY-SA 4.0
fixed broken link to Wikipedia; replaced broken link to www.math.niu.edu with WebArchive snapshot
Oct 25, 2023 at 21:29 review Suggested edits
S Oct 25, 2023 at 23:01
Jun 28, 2013 at 12:08 comment added François G. Dorais I'm out of the office so I can't check but Google books tells me there are four matches for "Goodstein" in the book (one of which is in the index). So I think it's worth a trip to the library.
Jun 25, 2013 at 18:39 comment added Lucas K. I have been thinking how exactly the second order proof goes. One should prove that if the exponents follow a well ordered relation, then the newly created relation is also well ordered. Which such proof, you can then do induction on the height of the exponent tower. Because, we are quantifying over all well ordered relations, this is a second order proof. In case of meta-logic (using Constructive omega rule), the quantification is on syntactical level.
Jun 24, 2013 at 18:26 comment added François G. Dorais Interesting! Have you checked Franzen's Inexhaustibility book? Sounds like this is a concrete way to see that $ACA_0$ with $\Sigma^1_1$-induction is not conservative over $PA$.
Jun 24, 2013 at 18:09 comment added Lucas K. Note, that Goodstein can be proven in second order logic. So, if the sets are defined by predicates and you allow quantification over it, you have effectively a second order system. The proof in such system might however become close to the transfinite proof.
Jun 24, 2013 at 17:45 answer added Lucas K. timeline score: 5
Jun 24, 2013 at 7:03 history asked user10891 CC BY-SA 3.0