[FOM] Goodstein's Theorem and Pi^1_1 comprehension
William Tait
wwtx at earthlink.net
Sun Apr 16 16:33:42 EDT 2006
On Apr 15, 2006, at 5:47 PM, Peter Smith wrote:
> If I'm following here and later in the book, Pi^1_1-CA_0 therefore has
> enough ooph to prove Goodstein's Theorem. Which gives us a familiar
> example
> of a first-order arithmetical statement unprovable in first-order
> PA (and
> so unprovable in ACA_0) but provable in Pi^1_1-CA_0.
Note that, although Steve Simpson points out in his book a close
model-theoretic relation between PA and ACA_0, the latter system is
proof-theoretically stronger: Its proof-theoretic ordinal is epsilon_
{omega X 2}, I think---certainly it is at least epsilon_{omega}, as
opposed to epsilon_0 for PA.
I haven't closely checked whether Goodstein's theorem is provable in
ACA_0; but it seems from the exposition I have seen in Potter's book
on set theory that it follows, using purely arithmetic reasoning by
induction on epsilon_0.
Bill Tait
More information about the FOM
mailing list