13
$\begingroup$

Is the consistency of classical third-order arithmetic provable in the logic of a topos with natural numbers?

(My guess would be yes, but I haven't seen this anywhere.)

Edit: in the original version I used the name PA$_3$ as an abbreviation for classical third-order arithmetic, and comments have followed suit, but I've since learnt that this name refers to a different theory (the classical theory of third order functions).

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

17
$\begingroup$

Let $\Omega_{\neg\neg} = \{p \in \Omega \mid \neg\neg p \Rightarrow p\}$ be the object of $\neg\neg$-stable truth values, and let us write $P_{\neg\neg}(A) = {\Omega_{\neg\neg}}^A$ for the object of $\neg\neg$-stable subobjects of $A$. Observe that $\Omega_{\neg\neg}$ is a complete Boolean algebra, and this fact can be shown in the internal logic of a topos.

Now, it seems to me that one can build a model of $\mathsf{PA}_n$ for each $n$, by interpreting its logic in $\Omega_{\neg\neg}$, and the (higher-order) predicates as elements of the iterates of the $\neg\neg$-powersets ${P_{\neg\neg}}^k(\mathbb{N})$.

Supplemental: I initially claimed we can have a model of $\mathsf{PA}_\infty$, but Paul pointed out I was overstating the case. Indeed, to have a model of $\mathsf{PA}_\infty$ we would need a single object that encompasses all finite iterates $\neg\neg$-powersets ${P_{\neg\neg}}^k(\mathbb{N})$ at once, says something like $\coprod_{n \in \mathbb{N}} {P_{\neg\neg}}^k(\mathbb{N})$. However, in an elementary topos such an object need not exist. A counter-model is the set $V_{\omega + \omega}$ of sets of rank below $\omega + \omega$.

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ [Deleted earlier comment - I hadn't read your message carefully.] $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 19, 2021 at 5:40
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Great answer, Andrej, but I think you slightly overstated. What this shows is that, for each $n \in \nats$, topos-with-nno logic can build a model of PA$_{n+1}$. I've edited my question to make this clearer. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 19, 2021 at 6:23
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Another way to see this answer is: $HOL_N$ (classical higher-order logic with NNO; the logic of a Boolean topos with NMO) clearly proves the consistency of each $PA_n$. But $HOL_N$ translates into $IHOL_N$ via the double-negation translation. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 19, 2021 at 6:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PaulBlainLevy: off the top of my head, I’m not sure of a reference that gives it syntactically — my first hope was Lambek & Scott, but I can’t find it there. Mac Lane and Moerdijk Theorem VI.1.3 shows that “in any topos, the subtopos of $\lnot \lnot$-sheaves is Boolean”, which directly implies the syntactic translation. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 23, 2021 at 20:14
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @PeterLeFanuLumsdaine I've found a reference, Troelstra and van Dalen "Constructivism in Mathematics, an introduction", Volume 1, Chapter 3, Section 9.3. I should have searched before asking you! $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 23, 2021 at 20:39

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .