[FOM] Re: 177:Strict Reverse Mathematics 1
friedman at math.ohio-state.edu
Thu Jun 12 03:08:19 EDT 2003
Reply to Newberry 6:37PM 6/11/03.
>"However, the problem is: how do we prove that this finitely
>branching tree exists?"
>The recursion formula for finite *binary* trees is the same as for Boolean
>lattices, but interpreted differently as to the meaning of '+'.
> T/n+1 =df= T/n + T/n
>where, in this case, '+' means "hang a copy of the R.H. T/n on
>every branch-tip of
>the L.H. T/n.
>The perfect infinite binary tree is the union over the countable
>sequence generated by
>For NON-binary trees I have no suggestions.
>"how to introduce infinite objects."
>Recursively define a (countably) infinite sequence and then take the
>union. It worked for
One has to get the particular finitely branching tree I need.
Arbitrary recursive definitions - even if they have an elementary
form such as quantifier free in some appropriate sense - go against
the whole point of Strict Reverse Mathematics. Things like an
arbitrary integer, or an arbitrary finite sequence of integers, are
More information about the FOM