Welcome to MathOverflow

Question

0

Is it correct saying that the Zero, Successor and Projection functions can be seen as combinators?

edited Dec 2 2010 at 21:03

asked Dec 2 2010 at 7:05

	This question would probably have been more appropriate at math.stackexchange.com, since while it’s a good question, it’s not really reasearch-level. – Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine Dec 2 2010 at 16:41
	sorry, I didn't know about math.stackexchange.com; I found out about it a minute ago – NoWhereMan Dec 2 2010 at 20:54

Ed Dean · Accepted Answer · 2010-12-02 07:35:38Z UTC

2

Yes, if I'm right in assuming you mean to ask whether these can be construed without free variables in the lambda calculus. (If my assumption is wrong, I apologize; your question is rather terse.) You can see here, for instance, how the "Church numerals" (Zero among them, of course) can be introduced, along with Successor and various other primitive recursive functions.

answered Dec 2 2010 at 7:35

Ed Dean
1,446●1●5●14

Your assumption is right. My question was terse because I'm very new to the subject, and it's still quite a lot confused in my head; I'm trying to understand by the help of something I think I'm more confident with (computability theory). Thank you! – NoWhereMan Dec 2 2010 at 21:07

Is it correct to state that basic primitive recursive functions are in fact combinators?

Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)

1 Answer

You can accept an answer to one of your own questions by clicking the check mark next to it. This awards 15 reputation points to the person who answered and 2 reputation points to you.