Timeline for About Grothendieck Universe and Tarski's A and A' Axioms
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 7, 2021 at 20:29 | history | edited | Joel David Hamkins |
edited tags
|
|
| Jun 17, 2010 at 6:56 | vote | accept | Gérard Lang | ||
| Jun 16, 2010 at 16:37 | comment | added | Marcos Cramer | Here is a translation of the passage you quoted from Tarski: "By the way, some equivalent reformulations of this axiom [A] are known. For example, one can replace conditions A1-A4 by the following conditions A1'-A4' (and actually each condition can be replaced independently of the others)." | |
| Jun 16, 2010 at 16:31 | answer | added | Joel David Hamkins | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jun 16, 2010 at 16:00 | history | edited | algori | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
split the posting into paragraphs
|
| Jun 16, 2010 at 15:47 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | Here is a link to Solovay's FOM post: cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2008-March/012783.html. Note the date is March, not Februrary. | |
| Jun 16, 2010 at 15:30 | comment | added | Gérard Lang | In each part A, B, C,of my message I have one question that is 1 (for A),2 (for B) and 3 (for C). My question 1 is: is it possible to have an equivalent theory in each three cases considered in A, when replacing the axiom "For every set x, there exists a set y containing x that is GU/ AT/ IN" by the axiom "There exists a proper class of GU sets/ AT sets/ INcardinals" | |
| Jun 16, 2010 at 15:07 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | Could you clarify exactly what you are asking in item A? Also, I would suggest that you might organize your question into paragraphs, in order that it might become easier to read. | |
| Jun 16, 2010 at 14:22 | history | asked | Gérard Lang | CC BY-SA 2.5 |