Can Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems Help Solve Advanced Logic Problems?

  • Thread starter Thread starter spenx01
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around an undergraduate philosophy student's struggle to solve complex questions related to Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems for an upcoming exam. The student has a foundational understanding of Peano Arithmetic but missed crucial classes, leading to difficulties in addressing the exam questions. Key topics include representability of finite sets in Peano Arithmetic, the expressibility of specific sets, and the implications of Gödel sentences. The student is seeking assistance to grasp these advanced concepts and successfully complete the exam. Time constraints and a lack of class attendance are significant challenges in their preparation.
spenx01
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am a undergraduate philosophy student at METU (Turkey). I took a phd course called Foundations of Logic 2. Our book is Taymond M. Smullyan : “Gödel’s incompleteness Theorems”. I have a take-home exam due to this Friday. I have to solve four questions. Yet, I am unable to solve any of them. If you help me to solve any of these questions, I will be very glad because without this exam I cannot be graduate.


Questions:
NOTE: the overlined “n” – n whith a dash over it – is symbolised as "nn" here because of lack of symbols. Thus, nn =overdashed-n. And, V1 is variable.
1.) a) Prove that all finite sets are representable in PA(Peano Arithmetic).
b) Find a formula F(v1) such that F(v1) expresses the set of even numbers but represent only the set of numbers divisible by six in PA.
c) how can part (b) generalized?
d) Is the set A={n : En[nn] is False} expressible?
e) Find a formula F(v1) which represents N (set of natural numbers) in PA but ∀v1F(v1) is not provable in PA.
2.) Find the mistake in the following “proof”.
Claim : The set P of Gödel numbers of sentences provable in PA is not representable in PA.
Proof : Assume on the contrary that there is a formula H(v1) which represents P:
n∈P ↔ PA ⊢ H(nn)
let X be a fixed point of the formula ~H(v1), that is;
PA⊢X ≡ ~H(X) --- the second X here is overdashed)
Now,
PA ⊢ X ↔ g(X) ∈ P ↔ PA ⊢ H(X) ↔ PA ⊬ X
A contradiction. Hence P is not representable.
3.) Let S be an extension of the system ( R ). Prove that every representable set A has a Gödel sentence with respect to S.
Hint: First prove that : “If the diagonal function d(x) is acceptable in S, then for every set A representable in S, there is a Gödel sentence for A”. Then show that d is acceptable in S.
4.) Prove : “If the diagonal function d(x) is strongly definable in S and S is inconsistent, then the set P is not definable in S.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't have to repost in multiple forums. In fact, you are not supposed to.

Do you understand your (Peano's) axioms? What have you tried so far?
 
honestrosewater said:
You don't have to repost in multiple forums. In fact, you are not supposed to.

Do you understand your (Peano's) axioms? What have you tried so far?

I understand Peano's axioms. I had taken a metalogic course before. But this time I was unable to attend the classes. I missed most of them. I don't know what to do. I am trying to read all the book from the beginning and solve the exercises. Yet, I think I don't have enough time.
Till now I can only prove Tarsky's incompleteness theorem on my own.
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
Back
Top