lolgarithms
- 120
- 0
what is the proof-theoretic strength (largest ordinal whose existence can be proved) for ZFC set theory?
Last edited:
g_edgar said:If an ordinal \alpha can be proved to exist, so can \alpha+1
So in fact you probably want least ordinal whose existence cannot be proved
What? All I can do is make the obvious guess, and I'm not even sure that's well-defined, let alone the answer you seek.lolgarithms said:please, hurkyl, don't make me wait!
What? All I can do is make the obvious guess, and I'm not even sure that's well-defined, let alone the answer you seek.
The obvious guess would (IMHO) be something like the supremum of all of the ordinals in the constructible hierarchy.lolgarithms said:if the smallest ordinal that can't be proven is well-defined: what is the guess?
And that's where the extent of my knowledge ends.CRGreathouse said:Perhaps it isn't well defined. What is known, then, about the supremum of the set of definable ordinals in ZFC, and the infimum of undefinable ordinals in ZFC?