Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:58:04.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Admissible ordinals and intrinsic consistency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Michael Machtey*
Affiliation:
Indiana University

Extract

This paper deals with a fundamental problem in the theory of recursion on initial segments of the ordinal numbers which was originated by Kripke [4] and Platek [8]. Following Kreisel-Sacks [3], we define a notion of relative recursiveness for this abstract recursion theory which allows us to speak of a function ƒ being weakly recursive in a set A via a partial recursive function g; this makes it reasonable to speak of partial recursive functions as ‘reduction procedures’. We say that a reduction procedure g is intrinsically consistent if for any set A there is a partial function ƒ which is weakly recursive in A via g. It is an elementary result of ordinary recursion theory that an arbitrary reduction procedure can be replaced in a uniform manner by an intrinsically consistent reduction procedure without the loss of any function f being reducible to any set A. In §3 we show that for recursion theory on the ordinals less than any infinite cardinal the analogous result is consistent with the axioms of set theory. In §5 we show that for all other cases of abstract recursion theory the analogous result fails in a very strong way to be true.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Cohen, P. J., Set theory and the continuum hypothesis, W. A. Benjamin, Inc., New York, 1966.Google Scholar
[2]Kleene, S. C., Introduction to metamathematics, Van Nostrana, New York, 1952.Google Scholar
[3]Kreisel, G. and Sacks, G. E., Metarecursive sets, this Journal, vol. 31 (1966), pp. 121.Google Scholar
[4]Kripke, S., Transfinite recursions on admissible ordinals, I, II, abstracts, this Journal, vol. 29 (1964), pp. 161162.Google Scholar
[5]McIntyre, J. M., Contributions to metarecursion theory, Ph.D. thesis, M.I.T., 1968.Google Scholar
[6]Ohashi, K., On a problem of G. E. Sacks, this Journal, vol. 35 (1970), pp. 4650.Google Scholar
[7]Owings, J. C., Topics in metarecursion theory, Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, 1966.Google Scholar
[8]Platek, R., Foundations of recursion theory, Ph.D. thesis and supplement, Stanford University, 1966.Google Scholar
[9]Sacks, G. E., Post's problem, admissible ordinals, and regularity, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 124 (1966), pp. 123.Google Scholar
[10]Sacks, G. E., Metarecursion theory, Sets, models and recursion theory, Crossley, J. N. ed., North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1967.Google Scholar
[11]Sukonick, J., Lower bounds for pairs of metarecursively enumerable degrees, Ph.D. thesis, M.I.T., 1969.Google Scholar
[12]Tharp, L. H., Set theory, mimeographed notes, M.I.T., 1966.Google Scholar