Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
11 hours ago comment added zeb How strange - you answered the question which was originally in my heart, but the technical question I actually ended up asking, about the existence of a CCMA theory, now seems like the more interesting question. I suppose that if no one can resolve that within a day or two I will accept this answer.
12 hours ago history edited Noah Schweber CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 878 characters in body
12 hours ago comment added Noah Schweber @zeb Ah yes I messed things up with existence. Removing for now ...
12 hours ago comment added zeb The existence argument seems a bit dubious - there's no guarantee that $\theta_0$ isn't already causing an inconsistency with true arithmetic, regardless of how the later $\theta_i$ are defined. The correctness claim seems to hold up - perhaps a simpler reason is that truth would become definable in any $\omega$-model of $T^+$.
12 hours ago history edited Noah Schweber CC BY-SA 4.0
added 26 characters in body
12 hours ago comment added Joel David Hamkins Noah, in the existence part, your definition is not recursive, since $\theta_{i+1}$ does not depend on $\theta_i$ or the earlier part of the construction. So I think you've haven't said what you intended. It seems you want to add them successively, not independently.
12 hours ago history edited Noah Schweber CC BY-SA 4.0
added 708 characters in body
12 hours ago comment added Joel David Hamkins To attempt to describe things for the OP a bit more softly: The truths of higher levels of set theory, such as truth in $H_{\omega_1}$ or $V_{\omega^2}$ and so forth, are more complicated than arithmetic truth, and so we cannot expect that those truths would be settled correctly by the desired sort of theory.
12 hours ago history answered Noah Schweber CC BY-SA 4.0