4 ms·
Good point. For (3), I should have said something about the axioms being computable. I think I already excluded cases like (4) by stating that the checker oper
by bumbledraven 4y ago
Good point. For (3), I should have said something about the axioms being computable.
I think I already excluded cases like (4) by stating that the checker operates on "arithmetical statement[s]".
- Tainnor 4y ago> I think I already excluded cases like (4) by stating that the checker operates on "arithmetical statement[s]". It's at least a bit vague, I think you need something that is at least as strong as Robinson arithmetic. In particular, I believe that if you throw out multiplication (or addition, and keep multiplication), you get a complete theory.