Joel David Hamkins

mathematics and philosophy of the infinite

Search

Main menu

Skip to primary content

Skip to secondary content

Home
Publications
Talks
Appointments and Grants
Teaching
- About My Courses
Students
- About My Graduate Students
- List of My Graduate Students
Mathematical Shorts
Math for Kids

Tag Archives: NWO

Modal logics in set theory, NWO grants, 2006 – 2008

Posted on April 30, 2006 by Joel David Hamkins

Reply

Modal logics in set theory, (with Benedikt Löwe), Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk (B 62-619), 2006-2008.

Share:

Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
Click to print (Opens in new window)
More

Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Posted in Grants and Awards | Tagged Amsterdam, NWO | Leave a reply

Recent Comments

Modal model theory | Joel David Hamkins on Modal model theory, STUK 4, Oxford, December 2019
Modal model theory | Joel David Hamkins on Modal model theory as mathematical potentialism, Oslo online Potentialism Workshop, September 2020
Paul on Transfinite Nim
Hew BG on All triangles are isosceles
Categorical large cardinals and the tension between categoricity and set-theoretic reflection | Joel David Hamkins on Categorical cardinals, CUNY Set Theory Seminar, June 2020

JDH on Twitter

Blogroll

A kind of library
Aleph zero categorical
Barbara Gail Montero
Benjamin Steinberg
Cantor’s Attic
Combinatorics and more
GC Math Department
Global Set Theory Talks
Gowers’s weblog
JDH on Wikipedia
Mathblogging.org
MathOverflow
Peano’s parlour
Richard Zach
Terence Tao

Mathoverflow activity

Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Can a fixed finite-length straightedge and finite-size compass still construct all constructible points in the plane?
@AlbertvanderHorst Doesn't Noam's observation (comment on the OP) enable you to pick the right directions? You can tile the whole region between the points before choosing the lines.
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Can a fixed finite-length straightedge and finite-size compass still construct all constructible points in the plane?
See also this 2008 article (in French) by Xavier Caruso xavier.toonywood.org/papers/publis/troppetit.pdf, which seems to use the same method.
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Can a fixed finite-length straightedge and finite-size compass still construct all constructible points in the plane?
Thanks for your excellent answer. This is great!
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Can a fixed finite-length straightedge and finite-size compass still construct all constructible points in the plane?
@WillSawin That is what I was trying to do, but didn't see how to carry out the scaling part. If you could post an answer, I'd be grateful.
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Can a fixed finite-length straightedge and finite-size compass still construct all constructible points in the plane?
Ah, I've realized that this answers the question I asked, but not the question I was thinking of, which was the relative constructibility question. Given points, can you still construct the same points relative to them? In other words, is the tool set fully equivalent? (Meanwhile, Will, please post your comment as an answer.)
Can a fixed finite-length straightedge and finite-size compass still construct all constructible points in the plane?
I am hoping that the brilliant MathOverflow geometers can help me out. Question 1. Suppose that I have a fixed finite-length straightedge and fixed finite-size compass. Can I still construct all constructible points in the plane? I know the answers in several variations. If I have compasses of arbitrary size, then I don't need a […]
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Who first characterized the real numbers as the unique complete ordered field?
@LSpice One can turn your argument around: it is precisely the excessive efforts to limit interesting questions on MO that has led in recent years to a reduced level of quality and engagement with MO. Have you observed this? To the extent that you are successful in transferring mathematically interesting questions to another site, I […]
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Who first characterized the real numbers as the unique complete ordered field?
See commentary on Twitter at twitter.com/JDHamkins/status/1271893175314141185

New York Logic

Title TBA
Resource Sharing Linear Logic, I
Sub-Kripkean epistemic models I
Generic logical semantics of justifications III
Generic logical semantics of justifications II
Generic logical semantics of justifications.
Cut Elimination
Functors and infinitary interpretations of structures
Recursive Reducts of PA III
Kripke completeness of strictly positive modal logics and related problems

Cantor’s Attic activity

Meta

Log in
Entries feed
Comments feed
WordPress.org

Subscribe to receive update notifications by email.

Email Address

Tags

absoluteness Arthur Apter automorphism towers buttons+switches CH chess class forcing computability countable models definability determinacy elementary embeddings equivalence relations forcing forcing axioms games GBC geology ground axiom HOD hypnagogic digraph indestructibility infinitary computability infinite chess infinite games ITTMs Jonas Reitz kids KM large cardinals maximality principle modal logic models of PA multiverse open games Oxford potentialism PSC-CUNY supercompact truth universal definition universal program Victoria Gitman W. Hugh Woodin weakly compact

Proudly powered by WordPress

Send to Email Address Your Name Your Email Address

Cancel

Post was not sent - check your email addresses!

Email check failed, please try again

Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.