sci.logic
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Explicit choice functions on subsets of R

Subject: Re: Explicit choice functions on subsets of R
From: Alan Smaill
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 23:16:29 +0100
Newsgroups: sci.logic
"Rupert" <rupertmccallum@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> aatu.koskensilta@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Rupert wrote:
>> > There is no definable well-ordering of the reals.
>>
>> That's certainly true. It is consistent with ZFC that there is a
>> definable well-ordering of the universe (and thus also of the reals),
>> though.
>>
>
> I may have expressed myself poorly. I think the result I wanted to cite
> was "no expression can be proved in ZF to define a well-ordering of the
> reals, assuming that ZF is consistent." Is that known?

attributed to Dana Scott in Bell's "Boolean-valued models and
independence proofs in Set Theory":
"if ZF is consistent, so is ZF + GCH + no definable well-ordering of
power set of omega."


>> --
>> Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta@xxxxxxxxx)
>>
>> "Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
>>  - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logic-Philosophicus
>

-- 
Alan Smaill

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Privacy Policy