9,134 research outputs found
Is the dream solution to the continuum hypothesis attainable?
The dream solution of the continuum hypothesis (CH) would be a solution by
which we settle the continuum hypothesis on the basis of a newly discovered
fundamental principle of set theory, a missing axiom, widely regarded as true.
Such a dream solution would indeed be a solution, since we would all accept the
new axiom along with its consequences. In this article, however, I argue that
such a dream solution to CH is unattainable.
The article is adapted from and expands upon material in my article, "The
set-theoretic multiverse", to appear in the Review of Symbolic Logic (see
arXiv:1108.4223).Comment: This article is based upon an argument I gave during the course of a
three-lecture tutorial on set-theoretic geology at the summer school "Set
Theory and Higher-Order Logic: Foundational Issues and Mathematical
Developments", at the University of London, Birkbeck in August 201
Mathematical Foundations of Consciousness
We employ the Zermelo-Fraenkel Axioms that characterize sets as mathematical
primitives. The Anti-foundation Axiom plays a significant role in our
development, since among other of its features, its replacement for the Axiom
of Foundation in the Zermelo-Fraenkel Axioms motivates Platonic
interpretations. These interpretations also depend on such allied notions for
sets as pictures, graphs, decorations, labelings and various mappings that we
use. A syntax and semantics of operators acting on sets is developed. Such
features enable construction of a theory of non-well-founded sets that we use
to frame mathematical foundations of consciousness. To do this we introduce a
supplementary axiomatic system that characterizes experience and consciousness
as primitives. The new axioms proceed through characterization of so- called
consciousness operators. The Russell operator plays a central role and is shown
to be one example of a consciousness operator. Neural networks supply striking
examples of non-well-founded graphs the decorations of which generate
associated sets, each with a Platonic aspect. Employing our foundations, we
show how the supervening of consciousness on its neural correlates in the brain
enables the framing of a theory of consciousness by applying appropriate
consciousness operators to the generated sets in question
Indeterminateness and `The' Universe of Sets: Multiversism, Potentialism, and Pluralism
In this article, I survey some philosophical attitudes to talk concerning `the' universe of sets. I separate out four different strands of the debate, namely: (i) Universism, (ii) Multiversism, (iii) Potentialism, and (iv) Pluralism. I discuss standard arguments and counterarguments concerning the positions and some of the natural mathematical programmes that are suggested by the various views
The modal logic of set-theoretic potentialism and the potentialist maximality principles
We analyze the precise modal commitments of several natural varieties of
set-theoretic potentialism, using tools we develop for a general
model-theoretic account of potentialism, building on those of Hamkins, Leibman
and L\"owe, including the use of buttons, switches, dials and ratchets. Among
the potentialist conceptions we consider are: rank potentialism (true in all
larger ); Grothendieck-Zermelo potentialism (true in all larger
for inaccessible cardinals ); transitive-set potentialism
(true in all larger transitive sets); forcing potentialism (true in all forcing
extensions); countable-transitive-model potentialism (true in all larger
countable transitive models of ZFC); countable-model potentialism (true in all
larger countable models of ZFC); and others. In each case, we identify lower
bounds for the modal validities, which are generally either S4.2 or S4.3, and
an upper bound of S5, proving in each case that these bounds are optimal. The
validity of S5 in a world is a potentialist maximality principle, an
interesting set-theoretic principle of its own. The results can be viewed as
providing an analysis of the modal commitments of the various set-theoretic
multiverse conceptions corresponding to each potentialist account.Comment: 36 pages. Commentary can be made about this article at
http://jdh.hamkins.org/set-theoretic-potentialism. Minor revisions in v2;
further minor revisions in v
Class forcing, the forcing theorem and Boolean completions
The forcing theorem is the most fundamental result about set forcing, stating
that the forcing relation for any set forcing is definable and that the truth
lemma holds, that is everything that holds in a generic extension is forced by
a condition in the relevant generic filter. We show that both the definability
(and, in fact, even the amenability) of the forcing relation and the truth
lemma can fail for class forcing. In addition to these negative results, we
show that the forcing theorem is equivalent to the existence of a (certain kind
of) Boolean completion, and we introduce a weak combinatorial property
(approachability by projections) that implies the forcing theorem to hold.
Finally, we show that unlike for set forcing, Boolean completions need not be
unique for class forcing
- …