Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-01T19:51:22.795Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The relation of A to Prov ˹A˺ in the Lindenbaum sentence algebra1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

C. F. Kent*
Affiliation:
Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada

Extract

Let U be a consistent axiomatic theory containing Robinson's Q [TMRUT, p. 51]. In order for the results below to be of interest, U must be powerful enough to carry out certain arguments involving versions of the “derivability conditions,” DC(i) to DC(iii) below, of [HBGM, p. 285], [F60, Theorem 4.7], or [L55]. Thus it must contain, at least, mathematical induction for formulas whose prenex normal forms contain at most existential quantifiers. For convenience, U is assumed also to contain symbols for primitive recursive functions and relations, and their defining equations. One of these is used to form the standard provability predicate, Prov ˹A˺, “there exists a number which is the Gödel number of a proof of A.” Upper corners denote numerals for Gödel numbers for the enclosed sentences, and parentheses are often omitted in their presence.

This paper contains some results concerning the relation between the sentence A, and the sentence Prov ˹A˺ in the Lindenbaum Sentence Algebra (LSA) for U, the Boolean algebra induced by the pre-order relation A ≤ B ⇔ ⊦A → B. Half of the answer is provided by a theorem of Löb [L55], which states that ⊦Prov ˹A˺ → A ⇔ ⊦A. Hence, in the presence of DC(iii), below, it is never true that Prov ˹A˺ < A in the LSA. However, there is a large and interesting set of sentences, denoted here by Γ, for which A < Prov ⌜A⌝.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

Research sponsored, in part, by NRC of Canada, grant A5603.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[F60]Feferman, S., Arithmetizatlon of metamathematics in a general setting, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 49 (1960), pp. 3592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[F62]Feferman, S., Transfinite recursive progressions of axiomatic theories, this Journal, vol. 27 (1962), pp. 259316.Google Scholar
[HBGM]Hilbert, D. and Bernays, P., Grundlagen der Mathematik, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1939.Google Scholar
[KL68]Kreisel, G. and Levy, A., Reflection principles and their use for establishing the complexity of axiomatic systems, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 14 (1968), pp. 97142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[L55]Löb, M., Solution of a problem of Leon Henkin, this Journal, vol. 20 (1955), pp. 115118.Google Scholar
[RTRF]Rogers, H. Jr., Theory of recursive functions and effective computability, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967.Google Scholar
[SBWT]Schütte, K., Beweistheorie, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1960.Google Scholar
[TMRUT]Tarski, A., Mostowski, A. and Robinson, R., Undecldable theories, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1966.Google Scholar