[FOM] Consequence of PA inconsistency
friedman at math.ohio-state.edu
Mon Apr 26 21:01:09 EDT 2010
I think that it is best, before we get into this standard technique,
to determine whether or not what I wrote is truly responsive to the
discussion that is going on about whether "an inconsistency in PA
refutes arithmetic Platonism". When I wrote this paragraph, I thought
it was responsive, but I would like to make sure.
On Apr 26, 2010, at 12:45 PM, Timothy Y. Chow wrote:
Harvey Friedman wrote:
> By using standard techniques, we can create an appropriately displayed
> proof in PA(101) of 1 = 0. You can look and see that the formulas to
> which induction is applied to are comprehensible to the "arithmetic
I'm afraid I'm not familiar with this standard technique. Could you
please spell it out a little for us? This sounds interesting.
More information about the FOM