Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T11:47:55.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Inconsistent models for relevant arithmetics1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Robert K. Meyer
Affiliation:
Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
Chris Mortensen
Affiliation:
University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia

Extract

This paper develops in certain directions the work of Meyer in [3], [4], [5] and [6] (see also Routley [10] and Asenjo [11]). In those works, Peano's axioms for arithmetic were formulated with a logical base of the relevant logic R, and it was proved finitistically that the resulting arithmetic, called R#, was absolutely consistent. It was pointed out that such a result escapes incautious formulations of Gödel's second incompleteness theorem, and provides a basis for a revived Hilbert programme. The absolute consistency result used as a model arithmetic modulo two. Modulo arithmetics are not ordinarily thought of as an extension of Peano arithmetic, since some of the propositions of the latter, such as that zero is the successor of no number, fail in the former. Consequently a logical base which, unlike classical logic, tolerates contradictory theories was used for the model. The logical base for the model was the three-valued logic RM3 (see e.g. [1] or [8]), which has the advantage that while it is an extension of R, it is finite valued and so easier to handle.

The resulting model-theoretic structure (called in this paper RM32) is interesting in its own right in that the set of sentences true therein constitutes a negation inconsistent but absolutely consistent arithmetic which is an extension of R#. In fact, in the light of the result of [6], it is an extension of Peano arithmetic with a base of a classical logic, P#. A generalisation of the structure is to modulo arithmetics with the same logical base RM3, but with varying moduli (called RM3i here).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

We wish to thank Graham Priest and Paul Thistlewaite for their help.

References

REFERENCES

[1]Anderson, Alan Ross and Belnap, Nuel D., Entailment, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1975.Google Scholar
[2]Dunn, J. Michael, Quantum mathematics, PSA 80 (Proceedings of the 1980 biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association; Asquith, P. and Giere, R., editors), vol. 2, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan, 1981, pp. 512531.Google Scholar
[3]Meyer, Robert K., Relevant arithmetic, Bulletin of the Section of Logic, vol. 5 (1976), pp. 133137.Google Scholar
[4]Meyer, Robert K., The consistency of arithmetic, unpublished monograph, Australian National University, Canberra, 1976.Google Scholar
[5]Meyer, Robert K., Arithmetic formulated relevantly, unpublished monograph, Australian National University, Canberra, 1976.Google Scholar
[6]Meyer, Robert K., P # #is included in R # #, in preparation.Google Scholar
[7]Meyer, Robert K., R 1—the bounds of finitude, Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik and Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 14 (1968), pp. 385387.Google Scholar
[8]Mortensen, Chris, Model structures and set algebras for Sugihara matrices, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 23 (1982), pp. 8590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Mortensen, Chris and Priest, Graham, The truth teller paradox, Logique et Analyse, vol. 24 (1981), pp. 381388.Google Scholar
[10]Routley, Richard, Ultralogic as universal, Exploring Meinong's jungle and beyond, Departmental Monograph, Philosophy Department, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, 1980, pp. 892962 (especially pp. 927–935).Google Scholar
[11]Asenjo, F. G., Towards an antinomic mathematics, Paraconsistent logic (Priest, G. and Routley, R., editors) (to appear).Google Scholar