Trying to understand an expression in Peano's Principia Arithmetices

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Nick O
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Expression
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on understanding the notation and implications of expressions in Peano's "Principia Arithmetices," specifically point 66. Key notations include [(x,y)∈]a, which denotes the set of solutions for the proposition a(x,y), and the symbols -=, Λ, and =, which represent "is not equivalent to," "the empty set," and "if and only if," respectively. The user seeks clarification on the meaning of [y∈]a in relation to propositions like x < y and x ⇒ y, and connects this to concepts in lambda calculus. The tautology presented is: ([(x,y)∈]a -= Λ) = (([x∈]([y∈]a -= Λ)) -= Λ).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Peano's axioms and their notation
  • Familiarity with propositional logic and set theory
  • Basic knowledge of lambda calculus
  • Experience with discrete mathematics concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Peano's "Principia Arithmetices" for foundational concepts
  • Learn about set notation and operations in set theory
  • Explore lambda calculus and its applications in mathematical logic
  • Investigate modern interpretations of discrete mathematics
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, and students of discrete mathematics seeking to deepen their understanding of logical expressions and set theory in the context of Peano's work.

Nick O
Messages
158
Reaction score
8
In the attached image, I am having trouble with point 66. I realize the notation is a bit archaic, so I'll explain as much as I can.

[(x,y)∈]a means "the set of solutions of the proposition a(x,y)." For example, the set of solutions to the proposition x < y.

-= means "is not equivalent to", and refers to two sets in each case here.

Λ means "the empty set".

The period is part of dot-parentheses notation. I'll tie everything together in parentheses in a little bit rather than explain it.

= means "if and only if" and links two propositions.

The next part is what bothers me.

I think [y∈]a is the set of solutions of a(x,y) in terms of x alone. But, what does this really mean? What would the resultant set be if a were the proposition x<y? What if it were x⇒y?

I suspect that this has some ties to lambda calculus, but that doesn't help me much since I have no real knowledge of it.

Now, all together, the tautology is:

([(x,y)∈]a -= Λ) = (([x∈]([y∈]a -= Λ)) -= Λ)

Can anyone help me understand the partial solution [y∈]a?
 

Attachments

  • uploadfromtaptalk1386529494162.jpg
    uploadfromtaptalk1386529494162.jpg
    47.1 KB · Views: 526
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Okay, I have been flipping through the pages of the discrete math book I'll be using next semester, and found a more intuitive (and probably more modern) way to understand this whole expression. It is simply this proposition:

∃x∃y(a(x,y)) ↔ ∃x(∃y(a(x,y)))
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K