HOME





Equiconsistent
In mathematical logic, two theories are equiconsistent if the consistency of one theory implies the consistency of the other theory, and vice versa. In this case, they are, roughly speaking, "as consistent as each other". In general, it is not possible to prove the absolute consistency of a theory ''T''. Instead we usually take a theory ''S'', believed to be consistent, and try to prove the weaker statement that if ''S'' is consistent then ''T'' must also be consistent—if we can do this we say that ''T'' is ''consistent relative to S''. If ''S'' is also consistent relative to ''T'' then we say that ''S'' and ''T'' are equiconsistent. Consistency In mathematical logic, formal theories are studied as mathematical objects. Since some theories are powerful enough to model different mathematical objects, it is natural to wonder about their own consistency. Hilbert proposed a program at the beginning of the 20th century whose ultimate goal was to show, using mathematical metho ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  


Large Cardinal
In the mathematical field of set theory, a large cardinal property is a certain kind of property of transfinite cardinal numbers. Cardinals with such properties are, as the name suggests, generally very "large" (for example, bigger than the least α such that α=ωα). The proposition that such cardinals exist cannot be proved in the most common axiomatization of set theory, namely ZFC, and such propositions can be viewed as ways of measuring how "much", beyond ZFC, one needs to assume to be able to prove certain desired results. In other words, they can be seen, in Dana Scott's phrase, as quantifying the fact "that if you want more you have to assume more". There is a rough convention that results provable from ZFC alone may be stated without hypotheses, but that if the proof requires other assumptions (such as the existence of large cardinals), these should be stated. Whether this is simply a linguistic convention, or something more, is a controversial point among distinct ph ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  


Consistency
In deductive logic, a consistent theory is one that does not lead to a logical contradiction. A theory T is consistent if there is no formula \varphi such that both \varphi and its negation \lnot\varphi are elements of the set of consequences of T. Let A be a set of closed sentences (informally "axioms") and \langle A\rangle the set of closed sentences provable from A under some (specified, possibly implicitly) formal deductive system. The set of axioms A is consistent when there is no formula \varphi such that \varphi \in \langle A \rangle and \lnot \varphi \in \langle A \rangle. A ''trivial'' theory (i.e., one which proves every sentence in the language of the theory) is clearly inconsistent. Conversely, in an explosive formal system (e.g., classical or intuitionistic propositional or first-order logics) every inconsistent theory is trivial. Consistency of a theory is a syntactic notion, whose semantic counterpart is satisfiability. A theory is satisfiable if it has a mod ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  


Reverse Mathematics
Reverse mathematics is a program in mathematical logic that seeks to determine which axioms are required to prove theorems of mathematics. Its defining method can briefly be described as "going backwards from the theorems to the axioms", in contrast to the ordinary mathematical practice of deriving theorems from axioms. It can be conceptualized as sculpting out necessary conditions from sufficient ones. The reverse mathematics program was foreshadowed by results in set theory such as the classical theorem that the axiom of choice and Zorn's lemma are equivalent over ZF set theory. The goal of reverse mathematics, however, is to study possible axioms of ordinary theorems of mathematics rather than possible axioms for set theory. Reverse mathematics is usually carried out using subsystems of second-order arithmetic,Simpson, Stephen G. (2009), Subsystems of second-order arithmetic, Perspectives in Logic (2nd ed.), Cambridge University Press, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511581007, ISBN 97 ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  




Second-order Arithmetic
In mathematical logic, second-order arithmetic is a collection of axiomatic systems that formalize the natural numbers and their subsets. It is an alternative to axiomatic set theory as a foundation of mathematics, foundation for much, but not all, of mathematics. A precursor to second-order arithmetic that involves third-order parameters was introduced by David Hilbert and Paul Bernays in their book ''Grundlagen der Mathematik''. The standard axiomatization of second-order arithmetic is denoted by Z2. Second-order arithmetic includes, but is significantly stronger than, its first-order logic, first-order counterpart Peano_axioms#Peano_arithmetic_as_first-order_theory, Peano arithmetic. Unlike Peano arithmetic, second-order arithmetic allows Quantification (logic), quantification over sets of natural numbers as well as numbers themselves. Because real numbers can be represented as (infinite set, infinite) sets of natural numbers in well-known ways, and because second-order arithmet ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  


picture info

Peano Arithmetic
In mathematical logic, the Peano axioms (, ), also known as the Dedekind–Peano axioms or the Peano postulates, are 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 axiomatization of arithmetic provided by Peano axioms is commonly called Peano arithmetic. The importance of formalizing 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 simplified version of them a ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  


Kurepa Tree
In set theory, a Kurepa tree is a tree (''T'', <) of height ω1, each of whose levels is , and has at least 2 many branches. This concept was introduced by . The existence of a Kurepa tree (known as the Kurepa hypothesis, though Kurepa originally conjectured that this was false) is with the axioms of ZFC: Solovay ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  


Mathematical Logic
Mathematical logic is the study of Logic#Formal logic, formal logic within mathematics. Major subareas include model theory, proof theory, set theory, and recursion theory (also known as computability theory). Research in mathematical logic commonly addresses the mathematical properties of formal systems of logic such as their expressive or deductive power. However, it can also include uses of logic to characterize correct mathematical reasoning or to establish foundations of mathematics. Since its inception, mathematical logic has both contributed to and been motivated by the study of foundations of mathematics. This study began in the late 19th century with the development of axiomatic frameworks for geometry, arithmetic, and Mathematical analysis, analysis. In the early 20th century it was shaped by David Hilbert's Hilbert's program, program to prove the consistency of foundational theories. Results of Kurt Gödel, Gerhard Gentzen, and others provided partial resolution to th ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  


Forcing (mathematics)
In the mathematical discipline of set theory, forcing is a technique for proving consistency and independence (mathematical logic), independence results. Intuitively, forcing can be thought of as a technique to expand the set theoretical universe (mathematics), universe V to a larger universe V[G] by introducing a new "generic" object G. Forcing was first used by Paul Cohen (mathematician), Paul Cohen in 1963, to prove the independence of the axiom of choice and the continuum hypothesis from Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. It has been considerably reworked and simplified in the following years, and has since served as a powerful technique, both in set theory and in areas of mathematical logic such as recursion theory. Descriptive set theory uses the notions of forcing from both recursion theory and set theory. Forcing has also been used in model theory, but it is common in model theory to define generic filter, genericity directly without mention of forcing. Intuition Forcing is ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  




Continuum Hypothesis
In mathematics, specifically set theory, the continuum hypothesis (abbreviated CH) is a hypothesis about the possible sizes of infinite sets. It states: Or equivalently: In Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice (ZFC), this is equivalent to the following equation in aleph numbers: 2^=\aleph_1, or even shorter with beth numbers: \beth_1 = \aleph_1. The continuum hypothesis was advanced by Georg Cantor in 1878, and establishing its truth or falsehood is the first of Hilbert's 23 problems presented in 1900. The answer to this problem is independent of ZFC, so that either the continuum hypothesis or its negation can be added as an axiom to ZFC set theory, with the resulting theory being consistent if and only if ZFC is consistent. This independence was proved in 1963 by Paul Cohen, complementing earlier work by Kurt Gödel in 1940. The name of the hypothesis comes from the term '' continuum'' for the real numbers. History Cantor believed the continuum ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  


Inaccessible Cardinal
In set theory, a cardinal number is a strongly inaccessible cardinal if it is uncountable, regular, and a strong limit cardinal. A cardinal is a weakly inaccessible cardinal if it is uncountable, regular, and a weak limit cardinal. Since about 1950, "inaccessible cardinal" has typically meant "strongly inaccessible cardinal" whereas before it has meant "weakly inaccessible cardinal". Weakly inaccessible cardinals were introduced by . Strongly inaccessible cardinals were introduced by and ; in the latter they were referred to along with \aleph_0 as ''Grenzzahlen'' ( English "limit numbers"). Every strongly inaccessible cardinal is a weakly inaccessible cardinal. The generalized continuum hypothesis implies that all weakly inaccessible cardinals are strongly inaccessible as well. The two notions of an inaccessible cardinal \kappa describe a cardinality \kappa which can not be obtained as the cardinality of a result of typical set-theoretic operations involving only sets of c ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  


Axiom Of Determinacy
In mathematics, the axiom of determinacy (abbreviated as AD) is a possible axiom for set theory introduced by Jan Mycielski and Hugo Steinhaus in 1962. It refers to certain two-person topological games of length ω. AD states that every game of a certain type is determined; that is, one of the two players has a winning strategy. Steinhaus and Mycielski's motivation for AD was its interesting consequences, and suggested that AD could be true in the smallest natural model L(R) of a set theory, which accepts only a weak form of the axiom of choice (AC) but contains all real and all ordinal numbers. Some consequences of AD followed from theorems proved earlier by Stefan Banach and Stanisław Mazur, and Morton Davis. Mycielski and Stanisław Świerczkowski contributed another one: AD implies that all sets of real numbers are Lebesgue measurable. Later Donald A. Martin and others proved more important consequences, especially in descriptive set theory. In 1988, John R. S ...
[...More Info...]      
[...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]