Timeline for Is the smallest $L_\alpha$ with undefinable ordinals always countable?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 5, 2018 at 8:45 | comment | added | Ralf Schindler | Thanks, Keith, this was a typo. I meant ZFC${}^-$ rather than ZFC, I edited and clarified. | |
| Sep 5, 2018 at 8:43 | history | edited | Ralf Schindler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 104 characters in body
|
| Sep 5, 2018 at 2:30 | comment | added | Keith Millar | Do you mean "assuming there are models of ZFC" because $L_{\mathcal{t}}$ exists under ZFC in every model, even in pointwise definable models. | |
| Sep 4, 2018 at 20:34 | vote | accept | Keith Millar | ||
| Sep 4, 2018 at 13:20 | history | edited | Ralf Schindler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 88 characters in body
|
| Sep 4, 2018 at 12:30 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila♦ | Well. The least $\gamma$ for which $L_\gamma$ is a model of ZFC also satisfies that it is a pointwise definable model. So certainly all the ordinals there are definable... | |
| Sep 4, 2018 at 12:16 | comment | added | Ralf Schindler | "fully elementary" | |
| Sep 4, 2018 at 12:15 | comment | added | Gro-Tsen | By $\prec$, do you mean "elementary submodel" or "$\Sigma_1$-elementary submodel"? | |
| Sep 4, 2018 at 12:10 | history | edited | Ralf Schindler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 138 characters in body
|
| Sep 4, 2018 at 12:02 | history | answered | Ralf Schindler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |