You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Constructible Models of Subsystems of ZF
The Journal of Symbolic Logic
Vol. 45, No. 2 (Jun., 1980), pp. 237-250
Published by: Association for Symbolic Logic
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2273185
Page Count: 14
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Mathematical logic, Mathematical set theory, Mathematical transitivity, Mathematical functions, Admissible sets, Parametric models
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
One of the main results of Gödel  and  is that, if M is a transitive set such that
$\langle M, \epsilon \rangle$ is a model of ZF (Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory) and α is the least ordinal not in M, then $\langle L_\alpha, \epsilon \rangle$ is also a model of ZF. In this note we shall use the Jensen uniformisation theorem to show that results analogous to the above hold for certain subsystems of ZF. The subsystems we have in mind are those that are formed by restricting the formulas in the separation and replacement axioms to various levels of the Levy hierarchy. This is all done in § 1. In § 2 we proceed to establish the exact order relationships which hold among the ordinals of the minimal models of some of the systems discussed in § 1. Although the proofs of these latter results will not require any use of the uniformisation theorem, we will find it convenient to use some of the more elementary results and techniques from Jensen's fine-structural theory of L. We thus provide a brief review of the pertinent parts of Jensen's works in § 0, where a list of general preliminaries is also furnished. We remark that some of the techniques which we use in the present paper have been used by us previously in  to prove various results about β-models of analysis. Since β-models for analysis are analogous to transitive models for set theory, this is not surprising.
The Journal of Symbolic Logic © 1980 Association for Symbolic Logic