cousin_it comments on Second order logic, in first order set-theory: what gives? - Less Wrong

10 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 23 February 2012 12:29PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (19)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: cousin_it 24 February 2012 05:54:22AM *  2 points [-]

I'm not completely sure of that myself, but consider this analogy. Let PA+X be a formal system that consists of the axioms of PA plus a new axiom that introduces a new symbol X and simply says "X is an integer", without saying anything more about X. Then it's easy to prove "X is either even or odd" in PA+X, but it would be wrong to say that PA+X has a unique distinguished "standard model" that pins down the parity of X. So my statement about CH is more of a statement about our intuitions possibly misfiring when they say a formal system must have a unique standard model.

Comment author: [deleted] 25 February 2012 07:03:43PM 0 points [-]

Are you comfortable rejecting the idea that PA has a "standard model"?