<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Critical points in an algebra of elementary embeddings · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_9205202/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_9205202/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Critical points in an algebra of elementary embeddings — mentioned by cevi</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42668719</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:math_9205202:42668719</guid><pubDate>Sat, 11 Jan 2025 20:34:55 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;There are plenty of mathematicians - mostly set theorists - who are actively working on finding new axioms of mathematics to resolve questions which can&amp;#x27;t be resolved by ZFC. Projective Determinacy is probably the most important example of a new axiom of mathematics which goes far beyond what can be proved in ZFC, but which has become widely accepted by the experts. (See [1] for some discussion about the arguments in favor of projective determinacy, and [2] for a taste of Steel&amp;#x27;s position on the subject.) I suggest reading Kanamori&amp;#x27;s book [3] if you want to learn more about this direction.…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_9205202/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.LO</category></item></channel></rss>
