Treatment of axioms of formal axiomatic theory

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the treatment of results derived from outside a formal axiomatized theory, specifically regarding Robinson Arithmetic (Q). It is established that Q-sentences, which include results about the "≤" relation, are not added to the axioms of Q when used in formal proofs. Instead, these sentences are utilized similarly to other theorems of Q that do not rely on induction. The conversation emphasizes the need for clarity in referencing proofs and understanding the integration of external results within the framework of Q.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of formal axiomatic theories
  • Familiarity with Robinson Arithmetic (Q)
  • Knowledge of mathematical induction
  • Ability to analyze formal proofs
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of external results in formal axiomatic systems
  • Study the role of induction in proving theorems within Robinson Arithmetic
  • Examine the structure and application of Q-sentences in formal proofs
  • Explore the relationship between axioms and theorems in formal logic
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, logicians, and students of formal logic who are interested in the foundations of axiomatic theories and the integration of external results into formal proofs.

agapito
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
What is the proper treatment of results about a formal axiomatized theory which are obtained from outside the theory itself? For example, there are 9 results dealing with the "≤" relation for Robinson Arithmetic, some of which are established by using induction, which is not "native" to Q.

Are these Q-sentences added to the axioms of Q when applied in some formal proof? Otherwise, where or how do they appear?

Thanks for any help.
 
Technology news on Phys.org
agapito said:
Are these Q-sentences added to the axioms of Q when applied in some formal proof?
No.

agapito said:
Otherwise, where or how do they appear?
I may have an idea about what you are asking, but I am not totally sure. It would be nice if you provided more details. Please give references to the proofs of theorems of Q that are proved by induction. And most importantly, please explain what you mean by "where or how do they appear?". They are used in exactly the same way as other theorems of Q that are proved without induction.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
608
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 210 ·
8
Replies
210
Views
18K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K