G del and formalism freeness
Download
1 / 25

Gödel and Formalism freeness - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 112 Views
  • Uploaded on

Gödel and Formalism freeness. Juliette Kennedy. Bill Tait. A. Heyting. Carnap diary entry Dec 1929. Gödel “On Russell’s Mathematical Logic” 1944. Kreisel 1972. Gödel Princeton Bicentennial lecture 1946. Gödel Princeton Bicentennial lecture 1946. Joint work with M. Magidor and J. Väänänen.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Gödel and Formalism freeness' - stacy-poole


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript









G del s two notions of definability
Gödel’s two notions of definability

  • Two canonical inner models:

    • Constructible sets

      • Model of ZFC

      • Model of GCH

    • Hereditarily ordinal definable sets

      • Model of ZFC

      • CH? – independent of ZFC


Constructibility
Constructibility

  • Constructible sets (L):


Ordinal definability
Ordinal definability

  • Hereditarily ordinal definable sets (HOD):

    • A set is ordinal definable if it is of the form

      {a : φ(a,α1,…, αn)}

      where φ(x,y1,…, yn) is a first order formula of set theory.

    • A set is hereditarily ordinal definable if it and all elements of its transitive closure are ordinal definable.



  • If V=L, then V=HOD=Chang’s model=L. (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

  • If there are uncountably many measurable cardinals then AC fails in the Chang model. (Kunen.)


C( (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic): L*)

  • L* any logic. We define C(L*):

  • C(L*) = the union of all L´α


Looking ahead
Looking ahead: (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

  • For a variety of logics C(L*)=L

    • Gödel’s L is robust, not limited to first order logic

  • For a variety of logics C(L*)=HOD

    • Gödel’s HOD is robust, not limited to second order logic

  • For some logics C(L*) is a potentially interesting new inner model.


Robustness of l
Robustness of L (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

  • Q1xφ(x) {a : φ(a)} is uncountable

  • C(L(Q1)) = L.

  • In fact: C(L(Qα)) = L, where

    • Qαxφ(x)  |{a : φ(a)}| ≥ אα

  • Other logics, e.g. weak second order logic, ``absolute” logics, etc.


Observations avoiding l
Observations: avoiding L (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

  • C(Lω1ω) = L(R)

  • C(L∞ω) = V


Quantifiers
Quantifiers (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

  • Q1MMxyφ(x,y) there is an uncountable X such that φ(a,b) for all a,b in X

    • Can express Suslinity.

  • Q0cfxyφ(x,y) {(a,b) : φ(a,b)} is a linear order of cofinality ω

    • Fully compact extension of first order logic.


Theorems
Theorems (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

  • C(L(Q1MM)) = L, assuming 0#

  • C(L(Q0cf)) ≠ L, assuming 0#

  • Lµ⊆C(L(Q0cf)), if Lµ exists


What myhill scott really prove
What Myhill-Scott really prove (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

  • In second order logic L2 one can quantify over arbitrary subsets of the domain.

  • A more general logic L2,F: in domain M can quantifier only over subsets of cardinality κ with F(κ) ≤ |M|.

  • F any function, e.g. F(κ)=κ, κ+, 2κ, בκ, etc

  • L2 = L2,F with F(κ)≡0

  • Note that if one wants to quantify over subsets of cardinality κ one just has to work in a domain of cardinality at least F(κ).


Theorem
Theorem (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

  • For all F: C(L2,F)=HOD

  • Third, fourth order, etc logics give HOD.


Bernays
Bernays (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

“It seems in no way appropriate that Cantor’s Absolute be identified with set theory formalized in standardized logic, which is considered from a more comprehensive model theory.”

-Letter to Gödel, 1961. (Collected Works, vol. 4, Oxford)


Thank you
Thank you! (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):


Robustness of l contd
Robustness of L (contd.) (HOD) can be seen as the constructible hierarchy with second order logic (in place of first order logic):

  • A logic L* is absolute if ``φ∈L*” is Σ1 in φ and ``M⊨φ” is Δ1 inM and φ in ZFC.

    • First order logic

    • Weak second order logic

    • L(Q0): ``there exists infinitely many”

    • Lω1ω, L∞ω: infinitary logic

    • Lω1G,L∞G: game quantifier logic

    • Fragments of the above


ad