= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
benelliott comments on Edward Nelson claims proof of inconsistency in Peano Arithmetic - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (115)
How do you get to 733 axioms? Maybe I'm being stupid, but doesn't PA run on just 5?
Strictly speaking, PA uses infinitely many axioms -- the induction axiom is actually an axiom schema, one axiom for each predicate you can plug into it. If you actually had it as one axiom quantifying over predicates, that would be second-order.
I think that Nelson denies that there is a completed infinity of predicates that you can plug into the schema.
Well, you'd certainly only need finitely many to prove inconsistency.
I think 733 is counting axioms, definitions, and theorems all.
That would explain it.
It said "733 axioms, definitions, and theorems"
I'm guessing 733 is the sum of the axioms, definitions and theorems, not just the axioms alone.