Asaf Karagila

There is no well defined notion for what is a large cardinal.

Forcing is great.

Here is some interesting piece of mathematical history: How the Fields medal went from "Soviet award" to "Mathematical Nobel".

This is not a blog post.

Earlier this morning I received an email question from Yair Hayut.

I've recently watched the finale of Cosmos, the new version, presented by Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Most, if not all, set theorists at one point or another were asked by a fellow mathematician to explain how forcing works.

John Oliver (and his team of writers, I suppose) makes a particularly sharp point about the role of the media in the debate about climate changes.

I have posted a new note on the Papers page.

Okay, I took the time to make some changes to my homepage.

First I must apologize.

There is a special trichotomy for cardinality of sets.

I recently returned from a wonderful week in Italy, where I attended the Young Set Theorist 2013 conference.

It's an almost trivial theorem of cardinal arithmetics in \(\ZF\) that given four cardinals, \(\frak p,q,r,s\) such that \(\frak p<q,\ r<s\) we have \(\frak p^r\leq q^s\).

What does the phrase "\(\varphi\) is a choice principle" mean?

In a recent math.SE question, Thomas Andrews asked whether or not the existence of an infinite linearly independent set in a vector space which is not finitely generated requires the axiom of choice.

I finally uploaded my M.Sc. thesis titled “Vector Spaces and Antichains of Cardinals in Models of Set Theory”.

What are numbers?

There has been a lot of recent discussions regarding Tom Leinster's paper "Rethinking set theory" (arXiv).

I have uploaded a note titled The Axiom of Choice and Self-Duality of Vector Spaces.

Well...