Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-w9n4q Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-20T07:17:44.530Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The hyperuniverse program

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2014

Tatiana Arrigoni  and
Sy-David Friedman
Tatiana Arrigoni
Affiliation:
Kurt Gödel Research Center For Mathematical Logic, Währingerstrasse 25, 1090 Vienna, Austria E-mail: arrigoni@fbk.eu, tatiana.arrigoni@istruzione.it
Sy-David Friedman
Affiliation:
Kurt Gödel Research Center For Mathematical Logic, Währingerstrasse 25, 1090 Vienna, Austria E-mail: sdf@logic.univie.ac.at
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Hyperuniverse Program is a new approach to set-theoretic truth which is based on justifiable principles and leads to the resolution of many questions independent from ZFC. The purpose of this paper is to present this program, to illustrate its mathematical content and implications, and to discuss its philosophical assumptions.

Keywords

independencelarge cardinalsmultiversePlatonism and Anti-platonismset-theoretic truth.
Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of Symbolic Logic , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 77 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

[1] Arrigoni, Tatiana and Friedman, Sy David, Foundational implications of the inner model hypothesis, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 163 (2012), pp. 1360–1366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Bagaria, Joan, Natural axioms of set theory and the continuum problem, Logic, methodology and philosophy of science. Proceedings of the twelfth international congress (Hájek, P. et al., editors), King's College Publications, 2005, pp. 43–64.Google Scholar
[3] Benacerraf, Paul and Putnam, Hilary (editors), Philosophy of mathematics. Selected readings, second ed., Cambridge University Press, 1983.Google Scholar
[4] Feferman, S., Dawson, J., Kleene, S., Moore, G., and Heijenoort, J. Van (editors), Kurt Gödel. Collected works, volume II, Oxford University Press, New York, 1990.Google Scholar
[5] Friedman, Sy David, Strict genericity, Models, algebra and proofs, Proceedings of the 1995 Latin American Logic Symposium in Bogota, Marcel Dekker, 1999, pp. 129–139.Google Scholar
[6] Friedman, Sy David, Fine structure and class forcing, De Gruyter Series in Logic and its Application, De Gruyter, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Friedman, Sy David, Internal consistency and the inner model hypothesis, this Bulletin, vol. 12 (2006), no. 4, pp. 591–600.Google Scholar
[8] Friedman, Sy David, Welch, Philip, and Woodin, W. Hugh, On the consistency strength of the inner model hypothesis, The Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 73 (2008), no. 2, pp. 391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Gödel, Kurt, What is Cantor's continuum problem?, American Mathematical Monthly, vol. 54 (1947), no. 9, Reprinted in [4], pp. 176–187. Quoted from [4].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Gödel, Kurt, What is Cantor's continuum problem?, Philosophy of mathematics. Selected readings (Benacerraf, P. and Putnam, H., editors), 1964, Revised and expanded version of [9]. Reprinted in [3], pp. 470–485 and [4], pp. 254–269. Quoted from [4], pp. 258–173.Google Scholar
[11] Hamkins, Joel, The set-theoretic multiverse, The Review of Symbolic Logic, vol. 5 (2012), pp. 416–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12] Jensen, Ronald, Inner models and large cardinals, this Bulletin, vol. 1 (1995), no. 4, pp. 393–407.Google Scholar
[13] Kanamori, Akihiro, The higher infinite, second ed., Springer, Berlin, 2003.Google Scholar
[14] Keisler, Jerome H., Model theory for infinitary logic, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1971.Google Scholar
[15] Koellner, Peter, On reflection principles, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 157 (2009), no. 2–3, pp. 206–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16] Maddy, Penelope, Believing the axioms I, II, The Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 53 (1998), pp. 481–511 and 736–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17] Magidor, Menachem, On the role of supercompact and extendible cardinals in logic, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 10 (1971), pp. 147–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18] Shelah, Saharon, The future of set theory, Set theory of the reals, Israel Mathematical Conference Proceedings, vol. 6, H. Judah, 1991, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
[19] Shelah, Saharon, Logical dreams, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 40 (2003), no. 2, pp. 203–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20] Steel, John, Mathematics needs new axioms, this Bulletin, vol. 6 (2000), no. 4, pp. 422–433.Google Scholar
[21] Wang, Hao, VI. The concept of set, From mathematics to philosophy, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1974, pp. 181–223.Google Scholar
[22] Woodin, W. Hugh, The Continuum Hypothesis, I–II, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 48 (2001), no. 7, pp. 567–576 and 681–690.Google Scholar
[23] Woodin, W. Hugh, The realm of the infinite, Infinity. New research frontiers (Heller, Michael and Woodin, W. Hugh, editors), Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 89–118.Google Scholar