Uncovering the Mystery of Algebraic Logic: A Comprehensive Guide

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter MathematicalPhysicist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the topic of algebraic logic, specifically exploring concepts from universal algebra and their connections to logical results. Participants inquire about specific terms and concepts mentioned in a book related to this field, including representations and various algebraic structures.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses curiosity about the relationship between completeness in logic and representation theory of groups, questioning the relevance of the terms used in the book.
  • Another participant provides an overview of universal algebra, explaining how it encompasses various algebraic structures and their defining operations and identities.
  • The concept of Omega-algebras is introduced, with examples of how groups and vector spaces can be defined within this framework.
  • The participant notes that the foundational aspects of universal algebra can be viewed as a special case of model theory, highlighting the similarities between algebraic identities and logical structures.
  • A later reply seeks clarification on specific terms like "gaggle" and "tonoids," indicating a lack of understanding or available information on these concepts.
  • One participant admits to having no knowledge of the terms "gaggle" and "tonoids," leaving the inquiry unresolved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the foundational aspects of universal algebra and its connection to model theory, but there is no consensus on the specific terms "gaggle" and "tonoids," as one participant is unable to provide information on them.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of the terms mentioned in the book, with some participants expressing uncertainty about their definitions and relevance within the broader context of algebraic logic.

MathematicalPhysicist
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
4,662
Reaction score
372
i searched at amazon for books, and find some books about this topic, and i wonder what does this topic cover?
in one book it states that:"The main theme is that standard algebraic results (representations) translate into standard logical results (completeness). "
ok i understand what completeness is, but what does it have to do with (if I'm right here) represntation theory of groups (unless there are other representations)?

and the book also says that it covers:"...gaggles, distributoids, partial- gaggles, and tonoids", what are they? (i tried wiki and mathworld and didn't find anything about them).

here's a link to the book:
http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-853192-3
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I know part of what the book is doing -- I'm a little familiar with universal algebra.

Universal algebra is an approach that can study many diverse kinds of algebraic structures simultaneously, such as:
groups, abelian groups, rings, modules over a ring, vector spaces over a particular field, algebraic lattices, algebras over a ring, representations of a discrete group acting on a vector space over a particular field, etc.

(but not fields!)

The connecting theme is that all of these structures can be defined by writing down the allowed operations, and some equational identities they satisfy.

For example, let Omega (that should be the capital Greek letter) be the type consisting of a binary operation *, a unary operation ^-1, and a nullary operation 1. (Yes, that's essentially just a constant, but it's fruitful to think of it as a function with no arguments)

The category of structures that have those three operations are called Omega-algebras.

The category of groups is a variety of Omega-algebras, defined by taking the quotient by the following relations:

1 * x = x
x * 1 = x
x * x^-1 = 1
x^-1 * x = 1
x * (y * z) = (x * y) * z


This is the general idea behind the foundations of universal algebra. Another example is vector spaces over a field K.

The type for this structure consists of the binary operation +, the unary operation -, the nullary operation 0, and one unary operation for every element of K.

Then, the equational identities include (among other things) one equation of the form
k (v + w) = k(v) + k(w)

for every element k of K.



Anyways, if you were reading what I said above, you knew logic but not algebra, you would have thought I was talking about model theory. :smile:

Specifying the underlying type of a universal algebra is essentially the same thing as specifying a formal language -- they're both simply a list of symols and how many arguments they accept.

The structures of this language are precisely the Omega-algebras.

In the univeral algebra setting, we take the quotient by certain algebraic identities to create the structures of interest.

In the logical setting, we look for structures that satisfy those algebraic identities. (i.e. models of those identities)


To repeat...

From the universal point of view, a group is nothing more than the quotient of Omega-algebra by a particular set of relations.

From the logical point of view, a group is nothing more than a structure in a particular language that satisfies a particular set of propositions.



So, foundationally at least, universal algebra is simply a special case of model theory where the statements to model take a particular form.
 
okay, thank for your input.
what about the terms i have specified, such as gaggle and tonoid?
 
I've no idea.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
11K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K