Which branch of math does that?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Werg22
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Branch
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the branch of mathematics that deals with proofs related to axioms in arithmetic, particularly focusing on the Peano axioms and their implications. Participants explore various mathematical fields, including abstract algebra and set theory, while discussing the nature of axioms and proofs.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the branch of mathematics that addresses proofs of axioms in arithmetic.
  • Another suggests that abstract algebra may be relevant to the inquiry.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the concept of proving axioms, stating that axioms, by definition, cannot be proven true or false from other statements.
  • There is a discussion about the Peano axioms, with one participant asserting their provability and questioning from what they can be proven.
  • A distinction is made between logical assumptions and formal proofs.
  • Recommendations for introductory set theory books are provided for those interested in proofs of the Peano axioms.
  • One participant elaborates on the nature of axiomatic mathematics, suggesting that mathematicians create axioms to govern formal systems, leading to the exploration of derived properties.
  • Another participant discusses the relationship between axioms and the natural numbers, providing a definition of natural numbers in terms of sets and referencing the historical context of the Peano axioms.
  • A link to additional resources is shared for further exploration of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of axioms and proofs, with no consensus reached on whether axioms can be proven or the best mathematical framework to explore these concepts.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the definitions and implications of axioms and proofs, as well as the historical context of the Peano axioms and their interpretations.

Werg22
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
1
Which branch of math deals with "proofs" of the axioms in arithmetic and such? I'd be interested to look into it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You may want to investigate abstract algebra.
 
I'm not sure exactly what you mean, as obviously nobody examines proofs of axioms!
 
Well the Peano axioms are certainly provable... Radou, are the Peano axioms explored in abstract algebra?
 
Werg22 said:
Well the Peano axioms are certainly provable...

Provable from what? If they are truly axioms then they can't really be proved true or false from other statements.
 
Axioms can be found logically... this is what I mean by "proof".
 
Werg22 said:
Axioms can be found logically... this is what I mean by "proof".

A logical assumption is very different from a proof.
 
If you are interested in a proof of the Peano axioms, you might want to look at an introductory set theory book, such as Halmos'.
 
Herstein's, Topics in Algebra, and then there are a few unknown books that I found which surveyed selections of abstract algebra, to give you an idea of how broad the spectrum is and provide you with an illustration so that you can select areas that you enjoy. If you are curious, I can give you those as well (although, they are REALLY old and seriously, no one has heard of them but I enjoyed pieces of them). I think this is the area that you are referring to? It's beautifully elegant, you will enjoy it.

As for axiomatic mathematics, I am under the impression that mathematicians construct axioms/assumptions/postulates to govern a particular formal logic system (such as an algebraic system) and from there, interesting properties emerge. If the system produces interesting properties, the system is studied further.

Mathematics are deductive because if the premises are true then the conclusion must be true because the conclusion is contained in the premises. However, the premises must be assumed true.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Given any system of axioms, there always exist a simpler system in which those axioms can be proved as theorems.

Peano's axioms assert that there exist a set of objects, N, called "natural numbers, and a function s (the "successor function"), from N to N such that
Axiom 1: There exist a unique member of N, call "0", such that s is a one to one function from N to N\{0}.
Axiom 2: If a subset, X, of N contains 0 and, whenever it contains n, it also contains s(n), then X= N.

You can, however, define the natural numbers in terms of sets: 0 is the empty set, 1 is the set containing only 1 (only the empty set), 2 is the set containing only 0 and 1, and, in general, given any n s(n) is the set containing n and all of its members. From that one can show that Peano's axioms are true.
Note: Historically, Peano's axioms included the number 0 as I have here. Nowadays, however, most people start with the number 1.

Werg22, you might find this interesting:
http://academic.gallaudet.edu/courses/MAT/MAT000Ivew.nsf/ID/918f9bc4dda7eb1c8525688700561c74/$file/NUMBERS.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
Ok thanks all. Complex, I will try to familiarize myself with the subject before considering any book purchase, so I must put you on hold. Halls, I will check the link you gave as soon as I can.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K