Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T21:00:05.298Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A choice free theory of Dedekind cardinals1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Erik Ellentuck
Erik Ellentuck*
Affiliation:
RutgersThe State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this paper we continue our investigation of the Dedekind cardinals which was initiated in [2]. Those results are summarized below. Let ω be the finite cardinals and Δ the Dedekind cardinals. In [7] Myhill defined a class of functions ƒ: Χκω→ω, which he called the combinatorial functions, and which he applied to the study of recursive equivalence types.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , 29 May 1969 , pp. 70 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1969

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.)

Footnotes

1

Research for this paper was supported in part by National Science Foundation contract number GP 5786.

References

[1]Cohen, P. J., Set theory and the continuum hypothesis, Benjamin, New York, 1966.Google Scholar
[2]Ellentuck, E., The universal properties of Dedekind finite cardinals, Annals of Mathematics, vol. 82 (1965), pp. 225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Gödel, K., Consistency proof for the generalized continuum hypothesis, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A., vol. 25 (1939), pp. 220–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[4]Gödel, K., The consistency of the continuum hypothesis, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N.J., 1958.Google Scholar
[5]Lévy, A., Independence results in set theory by Cohen's method. I, II, III, IV, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 10 (1963), pp. 592–593.Google Scholar
[6]Mostowski, A., Über die Unabhängigkeit des Wohlordnungssatzes vom Ordnungsprinzip, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 32 (1939), pp. 201–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Myhill, J., Recursive equivalence types and combinatorial functions, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 64 (1958), pp. 373–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Shoenfield, J., The problem of predicativity, Essays on the foundations of mathematics, Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 1961, pp. 132–139.Google Scholar