Löwenheim-Skolem theorems and Choice principles
... A referee indicated the author that the proof exposed here had already been published in [1], excercice 13.3. This result however is not widely known, as it was missed in the monography [3] ...
... A referee indicated the author that the proof exposed here had already been published in [1], excercice 13.3. This result however is not widely known, as it was missed in the monography [3] ...
Different notions of conuity and intensional models for λ
... Let < A, ≤> be any complete and co-complete poset (partially ordered set), P a generalized sequence of its elements (i.e. a sequence with directed set of indexes, not necessarily equal to the set of naturals). Then, in the case if P is increasing (decreasing), we define its limit as the least upper ...
... Let < A, ≤> be any complete and co-complete poset (partially ordered set), P a generalized sequence of its elements (i.e. a sequence with directed set of indexes, not necessarily equal to the set of naturals). Then, in the case if P is increasing (decreasing), we define its limit as the least upper ...
PDF
... In this entry, we show that the deduction theorem below holds for intuitionistic propositional logic. We use the axiom system provided in this entry. Theorem 1. If ∆, A `i B, where ∆ is a set of wff ’s of the intuitionistic propositional logic, then ∆ `i A → B. The proof is very similar to that of t ...
... In this entry, we show that the deduction theorem below holds for intuitionistic propositional logic. We use the axiom system provided in this entry. Theorem 1. If ∆, A `i B, where ∆ is a set of wff ’s of the intuitionistic propositional logic, then ∆ `i A → B. The proof is very similar to that of t ...
Bound and Free Variables Theorems and Proofs
... • each one encodes an infinite set of axioms (obtained by plugging in arbitrary formulas for A, B, C A proof is a sequence of formulas A1, A2, A3, . . . such that each Ai is either 1. An instance of Ax1 and Ax2 2. Follows from previous formulas by applying MP • that is, there exist Aj , Ak with j, k ...
... • each one encodes an infinite set of axioms (obtained by plugging in arbitrary formulas for A, B, C A proof is a sequence of formulas A1, A2, A3, . . . such that each Ai is either 1. An instance of Ax1 and Ax2 2. Follows from previous formulas by applying MP • that is, there exist Aj , Ak with j, k ...
Theories.Axioms,Rules of Inference
... concerns a given theory in a given logic. That theory is a set of axioms. The logic has rules of inference that allow us to generate other theorems from those axioms. (Axioms are theorems.) When we start ACL2, it has lots of functions already defined and it correspondingly has axioms for those funct ...
... concerns a given theory in a given logic. That theory is a set of axioms. The logic has rules of inference that allow us to generate other theorems from those axioms. (Axioms are theorems.) When we start ACL2, it has lots of functions already defined and it correspondingly has axioms for those funct ...
PDF
... from 1908 to 1917 he worked out a coherent account of processes generating lawless sequences—say of the kind arising from physical processes such as throwing a die. Kleene, Troelstra, and Van Dalen have managed to formalize these ideas—another sign that they are coherent. Here are four key axioms as ...
... from 1908 to 1917 he worked out a coherent account of processes generating lawless sequences—say of the kind arising from physical processes such as throwing a die. Kleene, Troelstra, and Van Dalen have managed to formalize these ideas—another sign that they are coherent. Here are four key axioms as ...
paper by David Pierce
... (2) to prove that all elements of those sets have certain properties; (3) to define functions on those sets. These three techniques are often confused, but they should not be. Clarity here can prevent mathematical mistakes; it can also highlight important concepts and results such as Fermat’s (Little ...
... (2) to prove that all elements of those sets have certain properties; (3) to define functions on those sets. These three techniques are often confused, but they should not be. Clarity here can prevent mathematical mistakes; it can also highlight important concepts and results such as Fermat’s (Little ...
FOR HIGHER-ORDER RELEVANT LOGIC
... relevant first-order logics is, on grounds examined in [3]. In particular, there are difficulties over identity; without safeguards, at least on the Leibniz definition of identity, one may prove even at the level R2 of second-order relevant implication such apparent fallacies of relevance as x = y → ...
... relevant first-order logics is, on grounds examined in [3]. In particular, there are difficulties over identity; without safeguards, at least on the Leibniz definition of identity, one may prove even at the level R2 of second-order relevant implication such apparent fallacies of relevance as x = y → ...
Hierarchical Introspective Logics
... via "undecidability", did not produce any specific example. But much more recently a paper was published by Paris and Harrington showing that a popular form of Peano arithmetic called PA- (upper suffix -) was incomplete because of the lack of a sufficiently strong "axiom of infinity". This result wa ...
... via "undecidability", did not produce any specific example. But much more recently a paper was published by Paris and Harrington showing that a popular form of Peano arithmetic called PA- (upper suffix -) was incomplete because of the lack of a sufficiently strong "axiom of infinity". This result wa ...
A counterexample to the infinite version of a
... A by the definition of A and yk 1!: A because by (*) yk is Although it is well-known that the infinite version of this theorem is false, counterexamples are not readily available in the literature. In this note we shall give a simple construction of ...
... A by the definition of A and yk 1!: A because by (*) yk is Although it is well-known that the infinite version of this theorem is false, counterexamples are not readily available in the literature. In this note we shall give a simple construction of ...
Natural Deduction Proof System
... • Natural Deduction tries to follow the natural style of reasoning. Most of the proof consists of forward reasoning, i.e. deriving conclusions, deriving new conclusions from these conclusions, etc. Occasionally hypotheses are introduced or dropped. • A derivation is a tree where the nodes are the ru ...
... • Natural Deduction tries to follow the natural style of reasoning. Most of the proof consists of forward reasoning, i.e. deriving conclusions, deriving new conclusions from these conclusions, etc. Occasionally hypotheses are introduced or dropped. • A derivation is a tree where the nodes are the ru ...
deductive system
... Let us fix a language L (of well-formed formulas). There are four main formulations of deductive systems: • Hilbert system, or axiom system: in this formulation, axioms are the main ingredient, and there are only one or two rules of inference (modus ponens is usually one of them). Theorems in a Hilb ...
... Let us fix a language L (of well-formed formulas). There are four main formulations of deductive systems: • Hilbert system, or axiom system: in this formulation, axioms are the main ingredient, and there are only one or two rules of inference (modus ponens is usually one of them). Theorems in a Hilb ...
Prolog arithmetic
... For all natural numbers x, y and z, if x = y and y = z, then x = z. That is, equality is transitive. For all a and b, if a is a natural number and a = b, then b is also a natural number. That is, the natural numbers are closed under equality. ...
... For all natural numbers x, y and z, if x = y and y = z, then x = z. That is, equality is transitive. For all a and b, if a is a natural number and a = b, then b is also a natural number. That is, the natural numbers are closed under equality. ...
logical axiom
... 2. (a → (b → c)) → ((a → b) → (a → c)) 3. (¬a → ¬b) → (b → a) where → is a binary logical connective and ¬ is a unary logical connective, and a, b, c are any (well-formed) formulas. Let us take these formulas as axioms. Next, we pick a rule of inference. The popular choice is the rule “modus ponens ...
... 2. (a → (b → c)) → ((a → b) → (a → c)) 3. (¬a → ¬b) → (b → a) where → is a binary logical connective and ¬ is a unary logical connective, and a, b, c are any (well-formed) formulas. Let us take these formulas as axioms. Next, we pick a rule of inference. The popular choice is the rule “modus ponens ...
axioms
... Relative Consistency • Definition: An axiom set is said to be relatively consistent if we can produce a model for the axiom set based upon another axiom set which we are willing to assume is consistent. • For example, we accept the validity of the axioms for the real numbers (or the real number lin ...
... Relative Consistency • Definition: An axiom set is said to be relatively consistent if we can produce a model for the axiom set based upon another axiom set which we are willing to assume is consistent. • For example, we accept the validity of the axioms for the real numbers (or the real number lin ...
Propositional logic
... Definition: an assignment to a set V of variables is a function s: V Æ {T,F}. Each assignment is inductively extended to apply to wffs. For wffs a and b • s(ÿa) = ÿs(a), • s(aŸb) = s(a) Ÿ s(b), • s(a⁄b) = s(a) ⁄ s(b), • s(afib) = s(a) fi s(b), • s(aÛb) = s(a) Û s(b), and • s(T) = T, s(F) = F, Defini ...
... Definition: an assignment to a set V of variables is a function s: V Æ {T,F}. Each assignment is inductively extended to apply to wffs. For wffs a and b • s(ÿa) = ÿs(a), • s(aŸb) = s(a) Ÿ s(b), • s(a⁄b) = s(a) ⁄ s(b), • s(afib) = s(a) fi s(b), • s(aÛb) = s(a) Û s(b), and • s(T) = T, s(F) = F, Defini ...
byd.1 Second-Order logic
... The language of second-order logic is quite rich. One can identify unary relations with subsets of the domain, and so in particular you can quantify over these sets; for example, one can express induction for the natural numbers with a single axiom ∀R ((R() ∧ ∀x (R(x) → R(x0 ))) → ∀x R(x)). If one ...
... The language of second-order logic is quite rich. One can identify unary relations with subsets of the domain, and so in particular you can quantify over these sets; for example, one can express induction for the natural numbers with a single axiom ∀R ((R() ∧ ∀x (R(x) → R(x0 ))) → ∀x R(x)). If one ...
The Unit Distance Graph and the Axiom of Choice.
... independent of the Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms of set theory, the current framework within which we do mathematics: i.e. that it is its own proper axiom! Pretty much all of modern mathematics accepts the Axiom of Choice; it’s an incredibly useful axiom, and most fields of mathematics need to be able to ...
... independent of the Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms of set theory, the current framework within which we do mathematics: i.e. that it is its own proper axiom! Pretty much all of modern mathematics accepts the Axiom of Choice; it’s an incredibly useful axiom, and most fields of mathematics need to be able to ...
Class 8: Lines and Angles (Lecture Notes) – Part 1
... 3. Only one line can be drawn through two given point A and B Collinear Points A set of three or more points are called collinear if one line can be drawn through all of them. Plane It is a flat surface (two dimensional surface) that extends infinitely in all four directions. Intersecting lines Two ...
... 3. Only one line can be drawn through two given point A and B Collinear Points A set of three or more points are called collinear if one line can be drawn through all of them. Plane It is a flat surface (two dimensional surface) that extends infinitely in all four directions. Intersecting lines Two ...
Class 8: Chapter 27 – Lines and Angles (Lecture
... 3. Only one line can be drawn through two given point A and B Collinear Points A set of three or more points are called collinear if one line can be drawn through all of them. Plane It is a flat surface (two dimensional surface) that extends infinitely in all four directions. Intersecting lines Two ...
... 3. Only one line can be drawn through two given point A and B Collinear Points A set of three or more points are called collinear if one line can be drawn through all of them. Plane It is a flat surface (two dimensional surface) that extends infinitely in all four directions. Intersecting lines Two ...
PDF
... We have already informally identified different approaches to understanding the natural numbers, 0,1,2,.... The first is based on a very simple theory of ...
... We have already informally identified different approaches to understanding the natural numbers, 0,1,2,.... The first is based on a very simple theory of ...
Godel`s Incompleteness Theorem
... • E.g. We can define a formula “Sentence(x)” which will be true iff x is the Gödel number of a FOL sentence, and we can show that if n is the Gödel number of a sentence, then “Sentence(n)” can be derived from PA1-6. In other words, ‘sentence-ness’ is definable (in LA) and representable (in PA). • Yo ...
... • E.g. We can define a formula “Sentence(x)” which will be true iff x is the Gödel number of a FOL sentence, and we can show that if n is the Gödel number of a sentence, then “Sentence(n)” can be derived from PA1-6. In other words, ‘sentence-ness’ is definable (in LA) and representable (in PA). • Yo ...
Plural Quantifiers
... This, of course, is the principle of mathematical induction. It cannot be formalized in firstorder terms. When we formalize arithmetic in first-order logic, we use instead an axiom schema, and posit as axioms all substitution instances of: ...
... This, of course, is the principle of mathematical induction. It cannot be formalized in firstorder terms. When we formalize arithmetic in first-order logic, we use instead an axiom schema, and posit as axioms all substitution instances of: ...
Solutions
... for all real numbers α established? It is possible to establish the Power Rule first for all rational α by elementary principles, then extending the rule to all real numbers by using the density of rationals, but this approach is quite tedious as many familiar fact about exponents need to be establi ...
... for all real numbers α established? It is possible to establish the Power Rule first for all rational α by elementary principles, then extending the rule to all real numbers by using the density of rationals, but this approach is quite tedious as many familiar fact about exponents need to be establi ...
Exercises: Use Induction. 1). Show that the sum of the
... 1). Show that the sum of the first n consecutive even natural numbers is n(n + 1). (Hint: Begin by finding a formula for the nth even natural number.) 2). Guess a formula for the sum of the first n consecutive odd natural numbers. Use induction to prove that your formula is correct. 3) Show 1 + 4 + ...
... 1). Show that the sum of the first n consecutive even natural numbers is n(n + 1). (Hint: Begin by finding a formula for the nth even natural number.) 2). Guess a formula for the sum of the first n consecutive odd natural numbers. Use induction to prove that your formula is correct. 3) Show 1 + 4 + ...
Peano axioms
In mathematical logic, the Peano axioms, also known as the Dedekind–Peano axioms or the Peano postulates, are a set of axioms for the natural numbers presented by the 19th century Italian mathematician Giuseppe Peano. These axioms have been used nearly unchanged in a number of metamathematical investigations, including research into fundamental questions of whether number theory is consistent and complete.The need to formalize arithmetic was not well appreciated until the work of Hermann Grassmann, who showed in the 1860s that many facts in arithmetic could be derived from more basic facts about the successor operation and induction. In 1881, Charles Sanders Peirce provided an axiomatization of natural-number arithmetic. In 1888, Richard Dedekind proposed another axiomatization of natural-number arithmetic, and in 1889 Peano published a more precisely formulated version of them as a collection of axioms in his book, The principles of arithmetic presented by a new method (Latin: Arithmetices principia, nova methodo exposita).The Peano axioms contain three types of statements. The first axiom asserts the existence of at least one member of the set ""number"". The next four are general statements about equality; in modern treatments these are often not taken as part of the Peano axioms, but rather as axioms of the ""underlying logic"". The next three axioms are first-order statements about natural numbers expressing the fundamental properties of the successor operation. The ninth, final axiom is a second order statement of the principle of mathematical induction over the natural numbers. A weaker first-order system called Peano arithmetic is obtained by explicitly adding the addition and multiplication operation symbols and replacing the second-order induction axiom with a first-order axiom schema.