FOM: What is necessary about the use of large cardinals?

Martin Davis martind at
Mon Mar 16 01:30:26 EST 1998

At 07:28 PM 3/15/98 -0800, Solomon Feferman wrote:

>In reponse [to Simpson] Franzen (13 March 14:19) rightly questioned this
>premature declaration (some would call it "drum-beating" or "advance
>hype").  In particular, he said:
>  "So without in any way seeking to belittle what is surely a remarkable
>piece of work, I think it's a bit too soon to characterize it as
>tremendously important progress in f.o.m."
>  I agree fully.  Others have disagreed, including Davis and Tait, in
>addition to Simpson and Friedman.  The latter two have pounced on Franzen
>for not trying to understand the results.

This is a very inaccurate account of what I said. I simple said that it was
complicated and I was working on it and answered Franzen's wonder about what
these k-subtle cardinals were about. I didn't intend to "pounce" on Franzen
and don't believe my message could be so described. 


More information about the FOM mailing list