Skip to primary content

Skip to secondary content

Joel David Hamkins

mathematics and philosophy of the infinite

Search

Main menu

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: Simons Foundation

Research in set theory, Simons Foundation, Collaborative Grant Award, 2011 – 2016

Posted on June 30, 2011 by Joel David Hamkins

Reply

J. D. Hamkins, Research in set theory, Simons Foundation, Collaboration Grant Award, 2011-2016.

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 a link 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 Simons Foundation | Leave a reply

Infinitely More

Recent Comments

Nataly on Draw an infinite chessboard in perspective, using straightedge only
Joel David Hamkins on Set-theoretic mereology: the theory of the subset relation is decidable
Joel David Hamkins on A gentle introduction to Boolean-valued model theory
Viktor Kuncak on Set-theoretic mereology: the theory of the subset relation is decidable
Joel David Hamkins on A gentle introduction to Boolean-valued model theory

JDH on Twitter

Mathoverflow activity

Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Negative of combinatorial game
This is related to what Gro-tsen has answered concerning whether negation and misere game are well-defined.
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Most 'unintuitive' application of the Axiom of Choice?
I would say that you don't have the theory of Lebesgue measure in that context. You might have a function of some kind that fulfills (one of) the standard definitions of Lebesgue measure, but it won't fulfill other standard definitions, which are no longer equivalent in that theory. What you would have is a pale […]
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Comparison of model-theoretic and axiomatic approaches to NSA
Ah, sorry, indeed I was thinking of standard sets. I don't know anything really about internal sets, as I rarely work in that framework.
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Comparison of model-theoretic and axiomatic approaches to NSA
In items 1 and 2, I wonder whether you are exaggerating the difficulty in using the model theoretic approach. For 1, if $A$ is infinite, including a sequence $\langle a_n\rangle_n$ of distinct elements, and then consider $a^*_N$ for some nonstandard $N$. By assumption this is standard, and so by elementarity it must have a standard […]
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Negative of combinatorial game
Every game can be played as a misère game, and every game is the misère game of another game, so I don't quite understand your question.
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Negative of combinatorial game
Yes, agreed. I was thinking of it mainly because those are the rules by which misere chess is often played in the club rooms at scholastic chess tournaments I have often attended when my kids were younger.
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Negative of combinatorial game
But I agree that without that convention play would be different.
Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Negative of combinatorial game
@TimothyChow Some forms of misère chess play with a forced capture rule (if you can capture you must), and in these forms, it can be advantageous to expose and thereby get rid of pieces that otherwise will be in effect controlled by your opponent.

Meta

Log in
Entries feed
Comments feed
WordPress.org

Subscribe to receive update notifications by email.

Email Address

Tags

Proudly powered by WordPress