Hi, would you be able to answer my question? I wanted to know if Cardinals are related to cardinality and Mahlos cardinals are related to cardinals, so would it be an additive to inaccessible cardinals? Cardinal Woodin is Mahlo because he is inaccessible and greater than other inaccessibles, he is Mahlo because he is an inaccessible greater than another, so far there is no doubt, but it follows that these cardinals besides Woodin are in themselves also defined cardinals? Thus, it is a cardinal property, and there are pre-defined ones, such as, for example, a weakly mahlo cardinal is a weakly inaccessible cardinal greater than another weakly inaccessible one, and they will not only be Mahlos cardinals, we can observe that a Mahlo only cardinal is different of a cardinal Woodin, which have f: Y to Y, elementary incorporation between V (Von Neumann Universe) and a transitive internal model M, and this escapes what is a Mahlo-only cardinal. Would this be correct?
Help this is alien language pr wtf
Hi, would you be able to answer my question? I wanted to know if Cardinals are related to cardinality and Mahlos cardinals are related to cardinals, so would it be an additive to inaccessible cardinals? Cardinal Woodin is Mahlo because he is inaccessible and greater than other inaccessibles, he is Mahlo because he is an inaccessible greater than another, so far there is no doubt, but it follows that these cardinals besides Woodin are in themselves also defined cardinals? Thus, it is a cardinal property, and there are pre-defined ones, such as, for example, a weakly mahlo cardinal is a weakly inaccessible cardinal greater than another weakly inaccessible one, and they will not only be Mahlos cardinals, we can observe that a Mahlo only cardinal is different of a cardinal Woodin, which have f: Y to Y, elementary incorporation between V (Von Neumann Universe) and a transitive internal model M, and this escapes what is a Mahlo-only cardinal. Would this be correct?