Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Gödel's incompleteness theorems wikipedia , lookup
Computability theory wikipedia , lookup
Quantum logic wikipedia , lookup
Mathematical proof wikipedia , lookup
Model theory wikipedia , lookup
Mathematical logic wikipedia , lookup
Boolean satisfiability problem wikipedia , lookup
List of first-order theories wikipedia , lookup
Non-standard analysis wikipedia , lookup
Laws of Form wikipedia , lookup
Adam Kolany EQUIVALENTS OF THE COMPACTNESS THEOREM FOR LOCALLY FINITE SETS OF SENTENCES Abstract We prove that the existence of consistent choices for dense relations, in short Ff in , is tantamout in ZF to the existence of such choices for n–element sets with n ≥ 3. Our interest in Ff in stems from [2] where it has been shown that Ff in is equivalent to CTf in – the Compactness Theorem for locally finite sets of propositional sentences. The condition CTf in , in turn, was suggested by Cowen [1] in connection with the P = N P – problem. The question whether Ff in is equivalent to ACf in , as well as the equivalence f in of F2 and AC2 are still open. A binary relation R on a set X is said to be dense iff for every a ∈ X {b ∈ X : ¬aRb} is finite; S let A be a family of sets and R a binary symmetric relation on A. A choice set S on A is R–consistent iff aRb for every a 6= b, a, b ∈ S. The existence of consistent choices, and its variants, are formulated as follows: F – for every nonempty family A of pairwise disjoint, finite and nonempty S sets and a binary symmetric relation R on A if every finite subfamily of A has an R–consistent choice, then the whole family A has such a choice set; Ff in – as above with additional assumption that R is dense; Fnf in – as above for families of exactly n–element sets; f in F≤n – as in Ff in for families of at most n–element sets. 12 Facts. f in Theorem 1. Fn+1 → Fnf in for every n ≥ 2. Proof. Let every finite subfamily A0 of A has an R–consistent choice. With every A ∈ A we corelate two distinct new elements, say ∗1A and ∗2A . Then we put A1∗ := A1 ∪ {∗1A }, A2∗ := A2 ∪ {∗2A }, where A1 , A2 are two disjoint “copies” of A e.g. A1 : {(a, 1) : a ∈ A}, A2 := {(a, 2) : a ∈ A}. Moreover let A∗ := {Ai∗ : A ∈ A, i = 1, 2}, A∗ : A1∗ ∪ A2∗ and π((a, i)) = a for a ∈ A, i = 1, 2. It should be noticed that A∗ is a family of n+1–element sets. A : A1∗ : A2∗ : a b ... z \|/ a1 | a2 /|\ \|/ b1 . . . | b2 . . . /|\ \|/ z1 | z2 /|\ A binary symmetric relation R∗ on diagram): S \|/ ∗1A ∗2A /|\ A∗ is defined as follows (see above 1. If x ∈ A∗ , y ∈ B ∗ , A 6= B, A, B ∈ A, then → if x or y is an “asterisk”, then xR∗ y; → otherwise xR∗ y iff π(x)Rπ(y), 2. If x, y ∈ A∗ , A ∈ A, then → if one of x or y is an “asterisk” then they are not in R; → otherwise xR∗ y iff π(x) = π(y). 13 f in Of course R∗ is dense, hence by Fn+1 , then exists an R∗ –consistent choice S ∗ of A∗ . Let us notice that for no A ∈ A, and no j = i, 2 ∗jA ∈ S ∗ . Let A ∈ A. If S ∗ ∩ A1 = {a1 } and S ∗ ∩ A2 = {a2 } then a1 R∗ a2 which shows, by the definition of R∗ , that a1 and a2 are the copies of the same element of A. Thus the set S := {π(x) : x ∈ S ∗ } is a choice on A. It is not difficult to notice that S is R–consistent. 2 f in Corollary 1. F f in → . . . → Fn+1 → Fnf in → . . . → F3f in → F2f in . Corollary 2. Fnf in → V k≤n ACk . Proof. One can easily show that Fkf in → ACk , for every k ≥ 2. f in Theorem 2. F3f in → F≤3 . Proof. Let A be a family of at most three–element, nonempty and pairS wise disjoint sets and R be a binary symmetric relation on A such that every finite subfamily A0 of A has an R–consistent choice. For any A ∈ A we define three–element set A∗ in a following way: 1. 2. 3. If A is three–element, we just put A∗ := A; If A is two–element, we choose aA ∈ A (by AC2 –comp. Cor. 2), and take A∗ := A ∪ {a∗A }, where a∗A is a fresh “copy” of aA ; If A has exactly one–element a, we choose its two “copies” a∗ and a∗∗ , and take A∗ := A ∪ {a∗ , a∗∗ }. Then we take A∗ := {A∗ : A ∈ A} and we define a binary relation R∗ on S ∗ A in the following way: xR∗ y iff π(x)Rπ(y), for x, y ∈ A∗ . 14 where ( π(x) := aA if x = a∗A , a∗∗ A x otherwise S Now the number of those elements y ∈ A∗ such that ¬(xR∗ y), is not S greater than twice the number of those a ∈ A for which ¬(π(x)Ra). Thus R is dense. Since every R–consistent choice on A is also an R∗ –consistent choice on A∗ , we get an R∗ –consistent choice S on the family A∗ . Then we easily see that {π(x) : x ∈ S} is an R–consistent choice on A. 2 As it is known (see [2]) Ff in is equivalent to some statement about propositional calculus. We consider the language {¬, ∧, ∨} and accept standard definitions of propositional formulae. A set X of propositional formulas is said to be locally satisfiable iff every finite subset X0 of X is satisfiable; X is locally finite iff every variable p of X appears only in finite number of formulas of X . The Compactness Theorem and its variants are the following statements: CT – every locally satisfiable set of propositional formulas is satisfiable; CTf in – every locally satisfiable and locally finite set of propositional formulas is satisfiable; n-Sat – every locally satisfiable set of elementary disjunctions consisting of at most n literals (a literal is a variable or its negation) is satisfiable; n-Satf in – as above for locally finite sets of elementary disjunctions; f in Theorem 3. F≤3 → 3-Satf in . Proof. Let X be locally satisfiable family of at most three–literal disjunctions in which every variable appears only finitely often. Let now for α ∈ X, Aα := {(l, α) : l is a literal in α} 15 and let A := {Aα : α ∈ X }. Of course A is a family of non–empty, at most three–element, pairwise disjoint sets. Taking R defined as follows: (l1 , α1 )R(l2 , α2 ) iff {l1 , l2 } is satisfiable, f in we easily see that A and R satisfy premises of F≤3 . Indeed, the density of R follows from local finiteness of X . Let now A0 be a finite subfamily of A. Then there is a finite X0 ⊆ X such that A0 ⊆ {Aa : α ∈ X0 }. Hence X0 is satisfied by some valuation v0 . Since elements of X0 are elementary disjunctions, the sets {(l, α) ∈ Aα : v0 (l) = 1}, for α ∈ X0 are nonempty. We know that for finite families AC holds, so we can choose exactly one (lα , α) from each of the above sets. Hence the set {(lα , α) : α ∈ X0 } is an R–consistent choice on A0 . Thus A has an R–consistent choice S. Putting now for any variables p: v(p) := 1 iff (p, α) ∈ S for some α ∈ X we get a valuation satisfying X . 2 Corollary 3. Fnf in → 3-Satf in , for n ≥ 3. R. Cowen proved in [1] that 3-Sat ↔ CT . The same argument can be used to establish 3-Satf in → CTf in . Thus, Corollary 4. (i) Fnf in ↔ Ff in , n ≥ 3, (ii) Fnf in ↔ CTf in , n ≥ 3. 16 Proof. The proof follows clearly from the above considerations and from [2]. The above could be seen as a variant of Fn ↔ F, n ≥ 3, proved by Levy [3] and Mycielski [5]. Let us, however, note that the arguments are quite different. As an immediate corollary of the above considerations we also obtain ACn → | Fnf in , for n ≥ 3. In case of AC2 → F2f in and ACf in → Ff in the problem is still open. Remark 1. Levy proves in [3] that F2 → | AC3 . Hence F2f in is not equivalent to Ff in . Besides, using similar method as Levy, we can demonstrate that | ACk for k 6= 2, 4. F2 → | ACk for every k 6= 2, 4. This shows F2f in → Warning. Implication ACf in → Ff in cannot be falsified with the popular technic of “permutation models”. It is known that ACf in → ACcount is true in any permutation model of ZF A (see [4], pp. 114, ex 11]) and ACcount → Ff in is proved in [2]. References [1] R.H. Cowen, Two hypergraph theorems equivalent to BPI, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 31 (1990), pp. 232–240. [2] A. Kolany, P. Wojtylak, Some remarks on the Compactness Theorem, to appear. 17 [3] A. Levy, Remarks on a paper by J.Mycielski, Acta Math. 14 (1963), pp. 125–130. [4] T.J. Jech, The axiom of choice, North Holland, Amsterdam–London 1973. Studies in Logic and Foundation of Mathematics 75. [5] Mycielski, Some remarks and problems on the colouring of infinite graphs and on the theorem of Kuratowski, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hung., 12 (1961), pp. 125–129. Department of Mathematics Silesian University 40–007 Katowice, Bankowa 14 Poland 18