[FOM] Woodin's pair of articles on CH
T.Forster at dpmms.cam.ac.uk
Wed Jan 13 17:23:31 EST 2010
On Jan 13 2010, William Tait wrote:In the other
> direction, a hereditarily countable set can be coded (not necessarily
> uniquely) by a well-founded tree whose nodes are natural numbers, which
> in turn can be coded by a set of natural numbers. The relation between
> two trees representing the same hereditarily countable set is definable
> in NT^2.
Is this the coding that is in play, as it were, in Woodin's thinking?
> I may be misremembering, but I think that Steve Simpson wrote a paper
> bearing on this in one of the past centuries.
Probably the 20th, but i no longer trust my memory.
>FOM mailing list
>FOM at cs.nyu.edu
More information about the FOM