[FOM] My claim that ZF proves: "There are no weakly inaccessible cardinals."

Michael Blackmon differentiablef at gmail.com
Fri Aug 19 14:29:34 EDT 2011

Decided to look through these, here are some problems which were enough
for me to stop 'reading' (in all honesty there isn't all that much to
read, its very repetitive.) It seems to me two things are happening:

1) He is mixing meta and formal statements in a way which is
contradictory from the get go.

2) He is making the assumption that you can close off a forcing notion
(that is collect all the possible generics ever and play with the
aggregate inside some model, which you cannot do.) 

On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 20:51 -0700, Alexander Kiselev wrote:
> 1) The statement that this claim is regarded as very dubious is not
> based on anything.
> 2) Links in the posted FOM message are  not proper  and the correct link is
> <http://lanl.arxiv.org/find/all/1/ti:+AND+Inaccessibility+Subinaccessibility/0/1/0/all/0/1>
> Sincerely   yours,                              Alexander  Kiselev
> _______________________________________________
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
> http://www.cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom

More information about the FOM mailing list