- Submit
-
Browse
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- More
Switch to: References
Citations of:
Add citations
You must login to add citations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sacks [23] asks if the metarecursively enumerable degrees are elementarily equivalent to the r.e. degrees. In unpublished work, Slaman and Shore proved that they are not. This paper provides a simpler proof of that result and characterizes the degree of the theory as [Formula: see text] or, equivalently, that of the truth set of [Formula: see text]. |
|
|
|
|
|
We introduce a quite natural Frege-style set theory, which we call Strong-Frege-2 equation image, a sort of simplification of the theory considered in 13 and 1 . We give a model of a weaker variant of equation image, called equation image, where atoms and coatoms are allowed. To construct the model we use an enumeration “almost without repetitions” of the Π11 sets of natural numbers; such an enumeration can be obtained via a classical priority argument much in the style of (...) |
|
|
We show, however, that this is not always the case. |
|
|
Georg Kreisel suggested various ways out of the Gödel incompleteness theorems. His remarks on ways out were somewhat parenthetical, and suggestive. He did not develop them in subsequent papers. One aim of this paper is not to develop those remarks, but to show how the basic idea that they express can be used to reason about the Lucas-Penrose-Putnam arguments that human minds are not finitary computational machines. Another aim is to show how one of Putnam’s two anti-functionalist arguments avoids the (...) |
|
|
§0. Introduction. In [16], Barwise described his graduate study at Stanford. He told of his interactions with Kreisel and Scott, and said how he chose Feferman as his advisor. He began working on admissible fragments of infinitary logic after reading and giving seminar talks on two Ph.D. theses which had recently been completed: that of Lopez-Escobar, at Berkeley, on infinitary logic [46], and that of Platek [58], at Stanford, on admissible sets.Barwise's work on infinitary logic and admissible sets is described (...) |
|
|
|
|
|
We generalize standard Turing machines, which work in time ω on a tape of length ω, to α-machines with time α and tape length α, for α some limit ordinal. We show that this provides a simple machine model adequate for classical admissible recursion theory as developed by G. Sacks and his school. For α an admissible ordinal, the basic notions of α-recursive or α-recursively enumerable are equivalent to being computable or computably enumerable by an α-machine, respectively. We emphasize the (...) |
|
|
We describe the important role that the conjectures and questions posed at the end of the two editions of Gerald Sacks's Degrees of Unsolvability have had in the development of recursion theory over the past thirty years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There exists a countable structure of Scott rank where and where the -theory of is not ω-categorical. The Scott rank of a model is the least ordinal β where the model is prime in its -theory. Most well-known models with unbounded atoms below also realize a non-principal -type; such a model that preserves the Σ1-admissibility of will have Scott rank . Makkai [M. Makkai, An example concerning Scott heights, J. Symbolic Logic 46 301–318. [4]] produces a hyperarithmetical model of Scott (...) |
|
|
|
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-5d8df9484f-nsbkm uwo