Talk:Fixed-point lemma for normal functions: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:22, 31 August 2011

Latest revision as of 20:32, 11 March 2024

(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{mathsWikiProject ratingbanner shell|class=Start|priority=Low|field=foundations}}

{{WikiProject Mathematics|priority=Low}}

}}

== Limit Ordinal Definition ==

Line 6 ⟶ 7:

My position, as stated on the talk page for [[Normal function]], is that there exist several current texts defining 0 as a limit ordinal. This being the case, a small change in wording which provides a correct definition for either case is, I believe, preferable. [[User:TricksterWolf|TricksterWolf]] ([[User talk:TricksterWolf|talk]]) 03:22, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

:Per [[WP:BRD]], the status of the article before you started editing it should be used until consensus is obtained; i.e., zero is '''not''' a [[limit ordinal]]. — [[User:Arthur Rubin|Arthur Rubin]] [[User talk:Arthur Rubin|(talk)]] 07:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

== Proof that normal functions commute with suprema ==

It seems like this should be proven, since the Fixed-point lemma is then just a corollary of that fact. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:TheKing44|TheKing44]] ([[User talk:TheKing44#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/TheKing44|contribs]]) 00:51, 28 October 2017 (UTC)</small>