Timeline for Formal proof of Con(ZFC) => Con(ZFC + not CH) in ZFC
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 11, 2012 at 2:08 | comment | added | Timothy Chow | Goldstern is also showing that the meta-theoretic argument can be carried out on the basis of ZFC. Arguments are not "executed inside models." They proceed from axioms according to rules of inference, and are therefore syntactic and not semantic. | |
| Feb 10, 2012 at 23:25 | comment | added | Tobias Neukom | Oh sorry I meant the answer by Goldstern not Stefan Hoffelner | |
| Feb 10, 2012 at 23:14 | comment | added | Tobias Neukom | I don't quite get that, what about the Model (M,E) of ZFC in step one? | |
| Feb 10, 2012 at 23:11 | comment | added | Timothy Chow | Well, I would phrase it as, he's taking the meta-theoretic argument and showing how it can be carried out on the basis of ZFC. No model M of ZFC enters the picture. | |
| Feb 10, 2012 at 23:01 | comment | added | Tobias Neukom | Thanks for your answer! That's what Stefan Hoffelner is doing in his reply, isn't it? He is taking the meta-theoretic argument and executing it inside a model M of ZFC? | |
| Feb 10, 2012 at 22:52 | history | edited | Timothy Chow | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added quote from Kunen
|
| Feb 10, 2012 at 22:44 | history | answered | Timothy Chow | CC BY-SA 3.0 |