User blog comment:Simply Beautiful Art/Intuition behind the Mahlo OCF/@comment-35470197-20190829142904/@comment-35470197-20190829152438

> I've never claimed to be a "mathematician".

I though that the statement "An evil mathematician joins the fray and says:" in the beginning of your comment means that you are introducing yourself as an evil mathematician. Ok, I seem to misunderstand what you meant.

> By "the" Mahlo OCF, I am referring to Rathjen's, or any equivalently strong one.

But Rathjen's standard OCF does not work in that way. The \(\chi\) function has two variables. The first variable will be collapsed, while the second variable is just used in the enumeration, which is not collapsed. It is neither continuous nor increasing on the first variable, while you are just explaining continuous collpasing.

> Aside from that, at the end of the post, I describe how one *could* create such an ordinal notation.

Where is the description? There is no description at the end of this blog post. If you are talking about your comment 「If one were going to try and do such, it would probably rely on deducing the general "nature" of \(\theta_\pi^\alpha(\mu)\) for \(\mu<\alpha\) and then for \(\mu\ge\alpha\)」, it is not explaining an idea at all.