Timeline for Is it an open problem whether fast-growing hierarchies can be defined without fundamental sequences?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Jun 21, 2020 at 15:02 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S Jun 21, 2020 at 15:02 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| Jun 13, 2020 at 16:13 | history | edited | Wojowu | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fixing a typo
|
| Jun 13, 2020 at 13:53 | comment | added | Wojowu | @PyRulez (half a year late, sorry!) Defining $F$ in $L$, the constructible universe, needn't work, because $\omega_1^L$, what $L$ believes to be the least uncountable ordinal, might be countable in $V$. So this would only define a hierarchy up to $\omega_1^L$ which needn't be equal to $\omega_1$. | |
| S Jun 13, 2020 at 13:45 | history | bounty started | Keshav Srinivasan | ||
| S Jun 13, 2020 at 13:45 | history | notice added | Keshav Srinivasan | Draw attention | |
| Nov 28, 2019 at 21:43 | comment | added | Christopher King | Can't you just define F in L? If F is valid in L, I think it would also be valid in V, right? | |
| Nov 13, 2019 at 6:37 | history | edited | Keshav Srinivasan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Nov 13, 2019 at 6:31 | history | asked | Keshav Srinivasan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |