[FOM] 167:Incompleteness Reformulated/More

Robert M. Solovay solovay at math.berkeley.edu
Wed May 7 18:21:13 EDT 2003

Theorem 1 looks wrong. Take S to say there is exactly one element.

Perhaps the saving clause is that you don't allow equality in the version
of the predicate calculus you are considering?

	--Bob Solovay

On Tue, 6 May 2003, Harvey Friedman wrote:

> In posting 165, I hadn't thought about T containing or deriving S.
> Here is a sharper version of posting 165.
> THEOREM 1. Let S be any consistent finite set of sentences in
> predicate calculus. There exists a consistent finite set T of
> sentences in predicate calculus such that T is not interpretable in
> S. We can take T to include S.

More information about the FOM mailing list