Skip to main content

All Questions

Filter by
Sorted by
Tagged with
26 votes
6 answers
3k views

Is there a metamathematical $V$?

As with many of you, I've been following Peter Scholze's recent question about universes with great interest. In ring theory, we don't often have to deal with proper classes, but they occasionally ...
Pace Nielsen's user avatar
  • 18.7k
2 votes
0 answers
2k views

Compatible and incompatible sets [closed]

Definition of the compatibility relation I have defined a relation $\mathsf{C}$ for sets that captures (to some extent) the notion of compatibility. In order to do this, we need an operation $': \...
elmo's user avatar
  • 121
2 votes
0 answers
325 views

The universe and multiverse views of set theory from the perspective of $ZFC^2$

(Note: the 'Second-order $ZFC$' ($ZFC^2$) I am talking about is the theory [in the second order language of set theory consisting of a single non-logical symbol $\in$ ] consisting of the axioms ...
Thomas Benjamin's user avatar
0 votes
2 answers
582 views

Why are model theorists free to use GCH and other semi-axioms? [closed]

Looking into the open problem section of the book Model theory by Chang and Keisler, I noticed that many problems assumed semi-axioms like GCH. I talk about 'semi-axioms' because these "axioms" are ...
user99445's user avatar
4 votes
3 answers
915 views

Compactness of existential second order logic and definability of certain quantifiers

It is known (as a slogan) that the "existential fragment of second-order logic (ESO) is compact". My first question is: (1) Is ESO compact for: (a) uncountable languages (b) languages with ...
mtg's user avatar
  • 135
2 votes
1 answer
880 views

Is second-order ZFC categorical with regard to its proper class models

Second-order ZFC offers partial categoricity in the sense that, given any two models, one of them must be isomorphic to an initial segment of the other [1]. However, this leaves questions regarding ...
Andy's user avatar
  • 95
15 votes
5 answers
2k views

Intended interpretations of set theories

In his Set Theory. An Introduction to Indepencence Proofs, Kunen develops $ZFC$ from a platonistic point of view because he believes that this is pedagogically easier. When he talks about the intended ...
Marc Alcobé García's user avatar
11 votes
2 answers
721 views

Inconsistency and workaday independence.

Set-theoretic topologists, for example, encounter many propositions that turn out independent from set theory. Sometimes these results require novel forcing arguments, but often they simply rely on ...
David Feldman's user avatar
18 votes
2 answers
3k views

Universe view vs. Multiverse view of Set Theory

Here I refer to Hamkins' slides: http://lumiere.ens.fr/~dbonnay/files/talks/hamkins.pdf particularly, to the "Universe view simulated inside Multiverse", p. 22. My question is: is it very unsound ...
Marc Alcobé García's user avatar
12 votes
2 answers
2k views

Proving Independence of Axioms by Exhibiting Models Which Don't Satisfy Our Intuition

I recently saw the proof of the independence of ZF (with allowance for multiple empty sets) and AC. The proof constructed the model based on a set theory generated by infinitely many empty sets and ...
David Corwin's user avatar
  • 15.4k
11 votes
5 answers
9k views

Models of ZFC Set Theory - Getting Started

For just any first-order theory: What are the sets I am supposed/allowed to think of when thinking of models as sets (of something + additional structure)? Provided: I can think of models of any ...
Hans-Peter Stricker's user avatar