Timeline for The Parity Principle and $\mathbf{C}_2$ (choice for $2$-sets)
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 16, 2023 at 6:34 | vote | accept | Dominic van der Zypen | ||
| Sep 15, 2023 at 18:41 | answer | added | Elliot Glazer | timeline score: 7 | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 17:36 | comment | added | Andreas Lietz | Youre right, I was talking nonsense! | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 16:33 | comment | added | Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine | @AndreasLietz: I don’t follow either, but for a different reason than Elliot Glazer. In trying to proving $\mathbf{C}_2$ (or even full choice) over a well-ordered base by induction, the difficulty at limit steps isn’t in choosing the “next point”, it’s in picking earlier choices for all previous steps together. | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 16:29 | comment | added | Elliot Glazer | @AndreasLietz I don't follow. The two different possibilities will have the same parity. | |
| Sep 14, 2023 at 11:16 | comment | added | Dominic van der Zypen | Thanks @JoelDavidHamkins for spotting my mistake, I intended to ask about the other implication and have corrected my error. | |
| Sep 14, 2023 at 6:31 | history | edited | Dominic van der Zypen | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Sep 13, 2023 at 10:53 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | Have you asked the question you intended? It seems we know that it does by the linked question, as you say. | |
| Sep 13, 2023 at 10:27 | history | asked | Dominic van der Zypen | CC BY-SA 4.0 |