FOM: Retraction of stupid statement

[Joe Shipman]

I said

"this does not quite give what I am asking for, because the models of "c

weakly inaccessible" constructed MAY have a real-valued measure on c.
I want a model where c is weakly inaccessible AND there is no measure.
If it happens that measurables are inconsistent, this will automatically

happen, but you need to do more than simply force c to be weakly
inaccessible in order to guarantee no measure."

but this is wrong, by Godel's completeness theorem the gap in
consistency strength MUST translate to a model where c is weakly
inaccessible and there is no measure, because if every model of "c
weakly inaccessible" satisfied RVM then "c weakly inaccessible implies
RVM" is valid. -- JS