Skip to main content
added 255 characters in body
Source Link
Zuhair Al-Johar
  • 11.3k
  • 1
  • 13
  • 47

If we replace the single axiom "Emergence" in the axiomatic system $T$ presented at posting [What is the set theory synonymous with this order-set theory], by the following schema. Would the resulting theory still be synonymous with $\sf PA$? If no, is there a kind of restricted synonymy notion that it would have with $\sf PA$?

$ \textbf {Emergence: } i=0,1,2,\dots; \ n=i-1, \dots, -1;\\ \max_i x < \max_i y \land (\bigwedge_n \max_n x = \max_n y ) \to x < y $

$ \max_{-1}x = \varnothing \\\max_0 x = \min y: \forall m \in x \, (m \leq y) \\ \max_{n+1} x = P_x(\max_n x); \text { if } n > -1$

Where $P_x$ is the predecessor relation on $x$. This is: $$ a=P_x(b) \iff a \in x \land b \in x \land a < b \land \not \exists c \in x: a < c < b$$

Where, "$\max_i x < \max_i y$" is defined as:

$ \exists b \, \bigl( b=\max_i y \land \forall a \, (a= \max_i x \to a < b) \bigr)$

While, " $\max_i x = \max_i y$" is defined as:

$\exists a \exists b \, (a=\max_i x \land b=\max_i y \land a=b)$

If we replace the single axiom "Emergence" in the axiomatic system $T$ presented at posting [What is the set theory synonymous with this order-set theory], by the following schema. Would the resulting theory still be synonymous with $\sf PA$? If no, is there a kind of restricted synonymy notion that it would have with $\sf PA$?

$ \textbf {Emergence: } i=0,1,2,\dots; \ n=i-1, \dots, -1;\\ \max_i x < \max_i y \land (\bigwedge_n \max_n x = \max_n y ) \to x < y $

$ \max_{-1}x = \varnothing \\\max_0 x = \min y: \forall m \in x \, (m \leq y) \\ \max_{n+1} x = P_x(\max_n x); \text { if } n > -1$

Where $P_x$ is the predecessor relation on $x$. This is: $$ a=P_x(b) \iff a \in x \land b \in x \land a < b \land \not \exists c \in x: a < c < b$$

If we replace the single axiom "Emergence" in the axiomatic system $T$ presented at posting [What is the set theory synonymous with this order-set theory], by the following schema. Would the resulting theory still be synonymous with $\sf PA$? If no, is there a kind of restricted synonymy notion that it would have with $\sf PA$?

$ \textbf {Emergence: } i=0,1,2,\dots; \ n=i-1, \dots, -1;\\ \max_i x < \max_i y \land (\bigwedge_n \max_n x = \max_n y ) \to x < y $

$ \max_{-1}x = \varnothing \\\max_0 x = \min y: \forall m \in x \, (m \leq y) \\ \max_{n+1} x = P_x(\max_n x); \text { if } n > -1$

Where $P_x$ is the predecessor relation on $x$. This is: $$ a=P_x(b) \iff a \in x \land b \in x \land a < b \land \not \exists c \in x: a < c < b$$

Where, "$\max_i x < \max_i y$" is defined as:

$ \exists b \, \bigl( b=\max_i y \land \forall a \, (a= \max_i x \to a < b) \bigr)$

While, " $\max_i x = \max_i y$" is defined as:

$\exists a \exists b \, (a=\max_i x \land b=\max_i y \land a=b)$

edited title
Link
Zuhair Al-Johar
  • 11.3k
  • 1
  • 13
  • 47

Would this alternationalteration of $T$ affect its synonymy with PA?

added 20 characters in body
Source Link
Zuhair Al-Johar
  • 11.3k
  • 1
  • 13
  • 47

If we replace the single axiom "Emergence" in the axiomatic system $T$ presented at posting [What is the set theory synonymous with this order-set theory], by the following schema. Would the resulting theory still be synonymous with $\sf PA$? If no, is there a kind of restricted synonymy notion that it would have with $\sf PA$?

$ \textbf {Emergence: } i=0,1,2,\dots; \ n=i-1, \dots, -1;\\ \max_i x < \max_i y \land (\bigwedge_n \max_n x = \max_n y ) \to x < y $

$ \max_{-1}x = \varnothing \\\max_0 x = \min y: \forall m \in x \, (m \leq y) \\ \max_{n+1} x = P_x(\max_n x) $$ \max_{-1}x = \varnothing \\\max_0 x = \min y: \forall m \in x \, (m \leq y) \\ \max_{n+1} x = P_x(\max_n x); \text { if } n > -1$

Where $P_x$ is the predecessor relation on $x$. This is: $$ a=P_x(b) \iff a \in x \land b \in x \land a < b \land \not \exists c \in x: a < c < b$$

If we replace the single axiom "Emergence" in the axiomatic system $T$ presented at posting [What is the set theory synonymous with this order-set theory], by the following schema. Would the resulting theory still be synonymous with $\sf PA$? If no, is there a kind of restricted synonymy notion that it would have with $\sf PA$?

$ \textbf {Emergence: } i=0,1,2,\dots; \ n=i-1, \dots, -1;\\ \max_i x < \max_i y \land (\bigwedge_n \max_n x = \max_n y ) \to x < y $

$ \max_{-1}x = \varnothing \\\max_0 x = \min y: \forall m \in x \, (m \leq y) \\ \max_{n+1} x = P_x(\max_n x) $

Where $P_x$ is the predecessor relation on $x$. This is: $$ a=P_x(b) \iff a \in x \land b \in x \land a < b \land \not \exists c \in x: a < c < b$$

If we replace the single axiom "Emergence" in the axiomatic system $T$ presented at posting [What is the set theory synonymous with this order-set theory], by the following schema. Would the resulting theory still be synonymous with $\sf PA$? If no, is there a kind of restricted synonymy notion that it would have with $\sf PA$?

$ \textbf {Emergence: } i=0,1,2,\dots; \ n=i-1, \dots, -1;\\ \max_i x < \max_i y \land (\bigwedge_n \max_n x = \max_n y ) \to x < y $

$ \max_{-1}x = \varnothing \\\max_0 x = \min y: \forall m \in x \, (m \leq y) \\ \max_{n+1} x = P_x(\max_n x); \text { if } n > -1$

Where $P_x$ is the predecessor relation on $x$. This is: $$ a=P_x(b) \iff a \in x \land b \in x \land a < b \land \not \exists c \in x: a < c < b$$

Source Link
Zuhair Al-Johar
  • 11.3k
  • 1
  • 13
  • 47
Loading