FOM: reply to McLarty
friedman at math.ohio-state.edu
Wed Mar 3 15:02:04 EST 1999
Reply to McLarty 5:16PM 3/3/99:
>Harvey Friedman 3 Mar 1999 15:20:21 answered my question
>>> "For every T, if T is a finitely axiomatized fragment of ZFC,
>>> then ZFC proves Consis(T)"
>>>Do you claim this statement is provable in EFA?
>I may well misunderstand something. It has happened. But if you could answer
>some questions for me it will help me see where I am wrong, if indeed I am.
>Does EFA also prove the following?
> "If ZFC proves [Consis(T) for every finitely axiomatized
> fragment of ZFC], then ZFC proves Consis(ZFC)"
Yes. More specifically, EFA proves:
"If ZFC proves [for all finitely axiomatized T of ZFC, Consis(T)] then ZFC
>But if EFA proves both those inset quoted
>statements, then it seems that EFA proves
> "ZFC proves Consis(ZFC)"
>Do you mean to say that EFA does prove:
> "ZFC proves Consis(ZFC)"?
More information about the FOM