More precisely, is there a "natural" statement (a statement that isn't deliberately constructed to be an example) that can be stated in PA, proved in ZFC, but not provable in PA?
More precisely, is there a "natural" statement (a statement that isn't deliberately constructed to be an example) that can be stated in PA, proved in ZFC, but not provable in PA?
7 Comments
ns1@feddit.uk · 6 pts · 1y
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodstein%27s_theorem
Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org · 6 pts · 1y
mo. abbr. please
jannaultheal@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 1y
Peano Axioms
ZFC
just_ducky_in_NH@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y
Plz!
Prime@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 1y
To be fair these abbreviations are ubiquitously used.
loppy@fedia.io · 3 pts · 1y
Well, Con(PA) is a "natural" statement I'd say, and ZFC proves Con(PA).
slazer2au@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1y
What does a Nikon camera have to do with IPv6 private address space?