Timeline for Relation of $\omega_{\omega_1+1}^{CK}$ to some other ordinals
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 2020 at 11:59 | vote | accept | SSequence | ||
| May 31, 2020 at 11:59 | comment | added | SSequence | Not sure why this question keeps getting bumped (somewhat unnecessarily, since the answer to primary question seems reasonably clear to me). I guess perhaps I should accept my own answer ...... I didn't accept it initially because I thought someone would point out if I was completely mistaken about something basic. | |
| Jan 2, 2020 at 18:43 | comment | added | SSequence | As far as I understand things, yes. Mainly because given an $\alpha \in Ord$ we can try all possible combinations of (finite) parameters $< \alpha$. That would be using the co-finality based definition. That is, given an ordinal $\alpha$ we could write a total predicate $checkAdmissible:Ord \rightarrow \{0,1\}$ such that $checkAdmissible(\alpha)$ returns true iff $\alpha$ is admissible. Also, the question has an easy equivalent formulation in terms of OTMs too (which I have also mentioned in text of question after edit). Just have $\omega_1$ number of $1$'s on the tape initially. | |
| Jan 2, 2020 at 18:17 | comment | added | Noah Schweber | Is checking whether an ordinal is admissible doable? (I'm not really familiar with ORMs.) | |
| Jan 2, 2020 at 9:41 | history | edited | SSequence | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 36 characters in body
|
| Jan 2, 2020 at 9:35 | history | answered | SSequence | CC BY-SA 4.0 |