Is there any first order formula true in only one of R and R*?
I would think that if the answer is NO then R < R*.
What I'm exploring is the connection of < to [=], with the statement
that < implies [=].
Are there any other comparitive relations besides elementary embedding
that would fit with wha
On 08 Dec 2010, at 22:15, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 12/8/2010 11:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Dec 2010, at 22:40, Brent Meeker wrote:
My reservation about step 8 is that the activity, in order to be a
computation, must have an interpretation.
Hmm... This is already a bit ambiguous
On 09 Dec 2010, at 05:12, Brian Tenneson wrote:
On Dec 5, 12:02 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Dec 2010, at 18:50, Brian Tenneson wrote:
That means that R (standard model of the first order theory of the
reals + archimedian axiom, without the term "natural number") is not
elementary embedd
3 matches
Mail list logo
