[FOM] The Gold Standard/correction
Timothy Y. Chow
tchow at alum.mit.edu
Thu Feb 23 18:15:22 EST 2006
Harvey Friedman <friedman at math.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
> This assessment is based on the premise that Grothendieck universes are
> to be properly viewed as a superfluous aberration. If not, then probably
> NBG + AxC would be the preferred vehicle, under the no coding rule.
This discussion reminds me of something that I again vaguely recall having
been discussed on FOM before, but this time I've actually gone to the
trouble of trying to search the archive and have not found anything. I
refer to a sci.math.research article by Vidhyanath Rao.
This seems to be another example of core mathematics that is not obviously
formalizable in (a conservative extension of) ZFC. Unless there have been
new developments since Nath Rao posted this?
More information about the FOM