Propositional Calculus: Is Algebra's Problem-Solver? Example

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter solakis1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculus
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between algebraic problems and propositional calculus, specifically whether every algebraic problem has a corresponding problem in propositional calculus. Participants explore definitions and examples, questioning the nature of correspondence between the two fields.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether every algebraic problem corresponds to a propositional calculus problem, suggesting that definitions of "algebra" and "corresponding" need clarification.
  • Another participant mentions the historical perspective of logicists attempting to reduce mathematics to logic, specifically true arithmetic identities to propositional tautologies.
  • A participant proposes that in the context of ordered fields, every proof based on first-order logic should have a corresponding propositional proof, although they acknowledge the complexity of translating first-order statements into propositional logic.
  • There is a suggestion to represent a specific algebraic proof using propositional variables, raising questions about the validity of such a representation.
  • Concerns are expressed regarding the expressiveness of first-order logic compared to propositional logic, indicating that translating proofs may not be straightforward.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether every algebraic problem corresponds to a propositional calculus problem. Multiple competing views are presented, particularly regarding the definitions and the feasibility of translation between the two logical frameworks.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in defining terms like "algebra" and "corresponding," as well as the challenges in translating first-order logic into propositional logic, which may affect the clarity of the arguments presented.

solakis1
Messages
407
Reaction score
0
Is there to every problem in Algebra a corresponding problem in propositional calculus??

Give an example
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think so, but one has to define "algebra" and "corresponding" more carefully. For example, I don't know what propositional formula would correspond to the fact that a polynomial of degree $n$ in a field has at most $n$ roots.

However, I heard that logicists tried to reduce all mathematics to logic, and in particular they thought they reduced true arithmetic identities on natural numbers without variables (like 7 + 5 = 12) to propositional tautologies.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
I don't think so, but one has to define "algebra" and "corresponding" more carefully. For example, I don't know what propositional formula would correspond to the fact that a polynomial of degree $n$ in a field has at most $n$ roots.

However, I heard that logicists tried to reduce all mathematics to logic, and in particular they thought they reduced true arithmetic identities on natural numbers without variables (like 7 + 5 = 12) to propositional tautologies.

You mean logicians?
lLet us be more precise. Let us say ordered fields(without the axiom of continuity).Theoretically speaking since every proof in ordered fields is based on 1st order logic which concists of propositional and predicate calculus ,there should be a propositional proof corresponding to every proof.

For example in the following simple proof what is the relevant propositional proof ccorresponding to that proof??

a>1 & b>2 => a>0 &b>0 => ab>0 => ab>= 0
 
solakis said:
You mean logicians?
No, I mean supporters of logicism.

solakis said:
Let us say ordered fields(without the axiom of continuity).Theoretically speaking since every proof in ordered fields is based on 1st order logic which concists of propositional and predicate calculus
Yes.

solakis said:
there should be a propositional proof corresponding to every proof.
It is not clear how to translate first-order statements, let alone proofs, into propositional logic. First-order logic is used for a reason, because it is much more expressive.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
No, I mean supporters of logicism.

Yes.

It is not clear how to translate first-order statements, let alone proofs, into propositional logic. First-order logic is used for a reason, because it is much more expressive.

Why,if in the previous proof we put:

a>1=A, b>2=B, 1>0=C, 2>0=D, a>0=E,b>0=F, ab>0=G, (ab=0)=H,then the proof in the propositional logic corresponding to the above proof is it not the following??

IF,
1. A^C=>E
2. B^D=>F
3. E^F=> G
4.D
5.C
THEN A^B=>GvH
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K