FOM: Re: theology
Roger Bishop Jones
rbjones at rbjones.com
Mon Oct 16 01:09:15 EDT 2000
In response to Thomas Forster: Sunday, October 15, 2000 5:19 PM
> I think i owe Roger J a small apology.
Not at all.
> I hadn't appreciated that
> all he was after was whether or not CH is decided by NGB (or MK)
> - an entirely innocent technical question to which the answer has
> long been know:
Nor had I.
My last message clarifies what I had meant by my first, and
this concerns derivability of CH or its negation in a logical system
which is very much stronger than NBG (or any recursively axiomatised
This leads me to suspect that I must be misunderstanding you.
Are you claiming that CH or its negation is provable in NBG?
If not, could I trouble you for a clarification of what you are claiming?
RBJones at RBJones.com
More information about the FOM