A Second-order arithmetic

  • Thread starter Thread starter Demystifier
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
First-order logic is not categorical, allowing for infinite models that cannot be uniquely defined by axioms, while second-order logic aims to address this issue but lacks semantic completeness. This raises questions about the existence of properties in second-order arithmetic that are valid in all models but cannot be proven by axioms. The discussion references Löwenheim-Skolem's theorem and Gödel's completeness theorem, noting that both are not applicable to second-order logic, leading to confusion about their implications. Participants express uncertainty about whether there are many inequivalent models in second-order Peano theory and the nature of properties that may be valid yet unprovable. The conversation highlights philosophical considerations regarding the limitations of mathematical models and the nature of axioms and validity.
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Demystifier said:
Nice. I only wished he would have mentioned AC when he wrote
"Every (non-empty) set of numbers has a least element."
as his basic phrase to describe second-order language or that he would have called it
"Every (non-empty) set of natural numbers has a least element."
especially as he mentioned the reals. I liked his emphasis on semantics very much.
 
  • #33
Demystifier said:
...
All these statements are considered true, but cannot be formally proved within the system to which they refer. ...
I'm just wondering if something as simple as the Goldbach's conjecture falls under these unprovable truths.
"every even natural number greater than 2 is the sum of two prime numbers"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldbach's_conjecture

Can it be proven that it is undecidable? That there is no proof whether it is true or not.
 
  • #34
Bosko said:
I'm just wondering if something as simple as the Goldbach's conjecture falls under these unprovable truths.
"every even natural number greater than 2 is the sum of two prime numbers"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldbach's_conjecture

Can it be proven that it is undecidable? That there is no proof whether it is true or not.
No. I think it is only a matter of time before we can prove (or disprove) it. If it were provably undecidable, people wouldn't still work on attempts to prove it, and we have already achieved partial results. Fermat took over 350 years, Goldbach is currently at 283.
 
  • #35
I don't know anything about second-order, so I can't comment much on points related to that.

However, it is worth mentioning that "second-order-arithmetic" can also often refer to a first order theory (often written as ##\mathrm{Z}_2##).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
9K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
283
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K