MHB Undecidability of $F[u, u^{-1}]$ in the Language $\{+, \cdot, 0, 1, u\}$

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the undecidability of the existential theory of the ring $F[u, u^{-1}]$ in various contexts. Theorems presented indicate that the existential theory is undecidable for fields with characteristic zero and those with characteristic greater than two. A clarification is sought regarding the reduction from the undecidability of $F[u, u^{-1}]$ in one language to another, specifically using a transformation involving $u$ and $t$. The poster asks for confirmation on the correctness of their reduction approach and the role of Lemma 1 in the proof of Theorem 3. The conversation emphasizes the complexity of proving undecidability in different algebraic structures.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

$F[u, u^{-1}]$ is a ring that contains the polynomials in $u$ and $u^{-1}$ with coefficients in the field $F$.

Some theorems are the following:

Theorem 1.

Assume that the characteristic of $F$ is zero. Then the existential theory of $F[t, t^{-1}]$ in the language $\{+, \cdot , 0, 1, t\}$ is unecidable. Theorem 2.

Assume that $F$ has characteristic $p>2$. Then the existential theory of $F[t, t^{-1}]$ is undecidable. Theorem 3.

If the characteristic of $F$ is other than $2$, then $F[t]$ has undecidable positive existential theory in the language $\{+, \cdot , 0, 1, t\}$.
To clarify something...

An existential statement of $F[u, u^{-1}]$ in the language $\{+, \cdot , 0, 1, u\}$ is of the form
$$\exists x_1, \dots \exists x_n \in F[u,u'] \phi(x_1, \dots , x_n)$$
where $\phi(x_1, \dots , x_n)$ can consist of $0$, $1$ and $u$ and has the operation $+$ and $\cdot$ between $0$, $1$, and $u$.

Is this correct?
I have a question that is related to the proof of Theorem $3$: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7LyulQBh6efQThrT3p3Y2lQNkE/view .

When we know that the existential theory of $F[u, u^{-1}]$ is undecidable in the language $\{+, \cdot , 0, 1, u\}$ and we want to show that the existential theory of $F[u, u^{-1}]$ is undecidable also in the language $\{+, \cdot , 0, 1, (u+u^{-1})/2\}$, we have to reduce the second problem to the first one, right?

Is the reduction as followed:

We have set $u=t+\sqrt{t^2-1}$ and $u^{-1}=t-\sqrt{t^2-1}$.

The mapping of the reduction is $u \mapsto u-t =:v$.

We write all the equations in the form $fv=g$ where $f,g \in F[t]$ and when we square these equations we get $f^2v^2=g^2 \Rightarrow f^2(t^2-1)=g^2$, so all the equations are in $F[t]$, where $t=(u+u^{-1})/2$.

Is this correct?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Technology news on Phys.org
Could you clarify to me at which point of the proof of Theorem $3$ we use Lemma $1$ ? Where does this Lemma help us?
 
Thread 'Is this public key encryption?'
I've tried to intuit public key encryption but never quite managed. But this seems to wrap it up in a bow. This seems to be a very elegant way of transmitting a message publicly that only the sender and receiver can decipher. Is this how PKE works? No, it cant be. In the above case, the requester knows the target's "secret" key - because they have his ID, and therefore knows his birthdate.
I tried a web search "the loss of programming ", and found an article saying that all aspects of writing, developing, and testing software programs will one day all be handled through artificial intelligence. One must wonder then, who is responsible. WHO is responsible for any problems, bugs, deficiencies, or whatever malfunctions which the programs make their users endure? Things may work wrong however the "wrong" happens. AI needs to fix the problems for the users. Any way to...
Back
Top