Timeline for Would strengthening Foundation and Choice in NBG, make it equi-consistent with MK?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 31 at 16:11 | comment | added | Zuhair Al-Johar | Ah I see. Thanks! | |
| Mar 31 at 16:05 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | The argument begins from the ZFC model. You get NBG by taking definable classes. But those have an order from the continuation of L beyond the height. | |
| Mar 31 at 15:55 | comment | added | Zuhair Al-Johar | Just a possible correction, in the first paragraph I think you mean "...since we have a transitive model of NBG + V=L" (you wrote ZFC + V=L) | |
| Mar 31 at 14:40 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | Ah, that is a stronger principle, but we can still get it in a similar way from KM. I have edited to explain. | |
| Mar 31 at 14:39 | history | edited | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1042 characters in body
|
| Mar 31 at 14:21 | comment | added | Zuhair Al-Johar | Yea! But, being pedantic, what I'm speaking about here is not Global choice. I'm speaking about a well-ordering over Classes and not just sets, and this would interpret Class Choice principles. But, again as you showed, this would get interpreted by the $L$-order. Thanks! | |
| Mar 31 at 14:10 | vote | accept | Zuhair Al-Johar | ||
| Mar 31 at 14:10 | history | edited | Zuhair Al-Johar | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Mar 31 at 12:25 | history | edited | Sam Hopkins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited pronoun to reflect preferences of the person in question: see https://kamerynjw.net/about-me/
|
| Mar 31 at 12:24 | history | edited | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 189 characters in body
|
| Mar 31 at 12:15 | history | answered | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |