Dominical categories are categories in which the notions of partial morphisms and their domains become explicit, with the latter being endomorphisms rather than subobjects of their sources. These categories form the basis for a novel abstract formulation of recursion theory, to which the present paper is devoted. The abstractness has of course its usual concomitant advantage of generality: it is interesting to see that many of the fundamental results of recursion theory remain valid in contexts far removed from their classic manifestations. A principal reason for introducing this new formulation is to achieve an algebraization of the generalized incompleteness theorem, by providing a category-theoretic development of the concepts and tools of elementary recursion theory that are inherent in demonstrating the theorem.

Dominical recursion theory avoids the commitment to sets and partial functions which is characteristic of other formulations, and thus allows for an intrinsic recursion theory within such structures as polyadic algebras. It is worthy of notice that much of elementary recursion theory can be developed without reference to elements.

By Gödel's generalized incompleteness theorem for consistent arithmetical system T we mean any statement of the following sort:

(1) if every recursive set is definable in T, then T is essentially undecidable [41]; or

(2) if all recursive functions are definable in T, then T is essentially undecidable [41]; or

(3) if every recursive set is definable in T, then T 0 and R 0 (the sets of Gödel numbers of the theorems and refutables of T) are recursively inseparable [39]; or

(4) if all re sets are representable in T, then T 0 is creative [28], [39]; or

(5) if T is a Rosser theory (i.e., all disjoint re sets are strongly separable in T), then T 0 and R 0 are effectively inseparable [39].

By Solovay's theorem [16], the modal logic of provability GL gives a complete description of the propositional schemata involving the provability predicate PrPA(x) for Peano arithmetic PA, which are provable in PA. However, many important aspects of provability cannot be fully expressed in terms of PrPA(x). For this reason, many authors have introduced extensions of GL which take account either of Rosser constructions or of other important metamathematical formulas (see, for example, [5], [6], [14], [16], and [19]). In this paper, we concentrate on the modal logic of the provability predicate for finitely axiomatizable subtheories of PA; the interest of this modal logic is based on the following facts. First of all, it provides a modal translation of a very important property of PA, namely the essential reflexiveness. Secondly, in view of Orey's theorem [10] it constitutes a possible approach to the study of interpretability of finite extensions of PA. Indeed, by Orey's theorem PA + θ is interpretable in PA + θ′ iff for every n, and, therefore, relative interpretability of finitely axiomatizable extensions of PA can be expressed by means of the provability predicate for finitely axiomatizable subtheories of PA.

In §1, we introduce three modal logics extending GL and discuss their arithmetical interpretations; §2 deals with Kripke semantics for two of these logics. In §3, a theorem on arithmetical completeness is shown, which characterizes the logic of the provability predicate for finitely axiomatizable subtheories of PA; a uniform version of this theorem is proved in §4.

We propose a logic for reasoning about metric spaces with the induced topologies. It combines the ‘qualitative’ interior and closure operators with ‘quantitative’ operators ‘somewhere in the sphere of radius r’ including or excluding the boundary. We supply the logic with both the intended metric space semantics and a natural relational semantics, and show that the latter (i) provides finite partial representations of (in general) infinite metric models and (ii) reduces the standard ‘ε-definitions’ of closure and interior to simple constraints on relations. These features of the relational semantics suggest a finite axiomatisation of the logic and provide means to prove its EXPTIME-completeness (even if the rational numerical parameters are coded in binary). An extension with metric variables satisfying linear rational (in)equalities is proved to be decidable as well. Our logic can be regarded as a ‘well-behaved’ common denominator of logical systems constructed in temporal, spatial, and similarity-based quantitative and qualitative representation and reasoning. Interpreted on the real line (with its Euclidean metric), it is a natural fragment of decidable temporal logics for specification and verification of real-time systems. On the real plane, it is closely related to quantitative and qualitative formalisms for spatial representation and reasoning, but this time the logic becomes undecidable.

This paper is a contribution to the growing investigation of strong reducibilities between ${\rm{\Pi }}_2^1$ statements of second-order arithmetic, viewed as an extension of the traditional analysis of reverse mathematics. We answer several questions of Hirschfeldt and Jockusch [13] about Weihrauch (uniform) and strong computable reductions between various combinatorial principles related to Ramsey’s theorem for pairs. Among other results, we establish that the principle $SRT_2^2$ is not Weihrauch or strongly computably reducible to $D_{ < \infty }^2$, and that COH is not Weihrauch reducible to $SRT_{ < \infty }^2$, or strongly computably reducible to $SRT_2^2$. The last result also extends a prior result of Dzhafarov [9]. We introduce a number of new techniques for controlling the combinatorial and computability-theoretic properties of the problems and solutions we construct in our arguments.

Since 1933, when Kolmogorov laid the foundations for probability and statistics as we know them today [1], it has been recognized that propositions asserting that such and such an event occurred as a consequence of the execution of a particular random experiment tend to band together and form a Boolean algebra. In 1936, Birkhoff and von Neumann [2] suggested that the so-called logic of quantum mechanics should not be a Boolean algebra, but rather should form what is now called a modular ortholattice [3]. Presumably, the departure from Boolean algebras encountered in quantum mechanics can be attributed to the fact that in quantum mechanics, one must consider more than one physical experiment, e.g., an experiment measuring position, an experiment measuring charge, an experiment measuring momentum, etc., and, because of the uncertainty principle, these experiments need not admit a common refinement in terms of which the Kolmogorov theory is directly applicable.

Mackey's Axioms I–VI for quantum mechanics [4] imply that the logic of quantum mechanics should be a σ-orthocomplete orthomodular poset [5]. Most contemporary practitioners of quantum logic seem to agree that a quantum logic is (at least) an orthomodular poset [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] or some variation thereof [11]. P. D. Finch [12] has shown that every completely orthomodular poset is the logic arising from sets of Boolean logics, where these sets have a structure similar to the structures generally given to quantum logic. In all of these versions of quantum logic, a fundamental relation, the relation of compatibility or commutativity, plays a decisive role.

A sequent calculus is given in which the management of weakening and contraction is organized as in natural deduction. The latter has no explicit weakening or contraction, but vacuous and multiple discharges in rules that discharge assumptions. A comparison to natural deduction is given through translation of derivations between the two systems. It is proved that if a cut formula is never principal in a derivation leading to the right premiss of cut, it is a subformula of the conclusion. Therefore it is sufficient to eliminate those cuts that correspond to detour and permutation conversions in natural deduction.

Let E ⊲ F iff E and F are extenders and E ∈ Ult(V, F). Intuitively, E ⊲ F implies that E is weaker—embodies less reflection—than F. The relation ⊲ was first considered by W. Mitchell in [M74], where it arises naturally in connection with inner models and coherent sequences. Mitchell showed in [M74] that the restriction of ⊲ to normal ultrafilters is well-founded.

The relation ⊲ is now known as the Mitchell order, although it is not actually an order. It is irreflexive, and its restriction to normal ultrafilters is transitive, but under mild large cardinal hypotheses, it is not transitive on all extenders. Here is a counterexample. Let κ be (λ + 2)-strong, where λ > κ and λ is measurable. Let E be an extender with critical point κ and let U be a normal ultrafilter with critical point λ such that U ∈ Ult(V, E). Let i: V → Ult(V, U) be the canonical embedding. Then i(E) ⊲ U and U ⊲ E, but by 3.11 of [MS2], it is not the case that i(E) ⊲ E. (The referee pointed out the following elementary proof of this fact. Notice that i ↾ Vλ+2 ∈ Ult(V, E) and X ∈ Ea ⇔ X ∈ i(E)i(a). Moreover, we may assume without loss of generality that = support(E). Thus, if i(E) ∈ Ult(V, E), then E ∈ Ult(V, E), a contradiction.)

By going to much stronger extenders, one can show the Mitchell order is not well-founded. The following example is well known. Let j: V → M be elementary, with Vλ ⊆ M for λ = joω(crit(j)). (By Kunen, Vλ+1 ∉ M.) Let E0 be the (crit(j), λ) extender derived from j, and let En+1 = i(En), where i: V → Ult(V, En) is the canonical embedding. One can show inductively that En is an extender over V, and thereby, that En+1 ⊲ En for all n < ω. (There is a little work in showing that Ult(V, En+1) is well-founded.)

Basically, the connection of two many-sorted theories is obtained by taking their disjoint union, and then connecting the two parts through connection functions that must behave like homomorphisms on the shared signature. We determine conditions under which decidability of the validity of universal formulae in the component theories transfers to their connection. In addition, we consider variants of the basic connection scheme. Our results can be seen as a generalization of the so-called -connection approach for combining modal logics to an algebraic setting.

Though equations are among the simplest sentences available in a first order language, many of the most familiar notions from algebra can be expressed by sets of equations. It is the task of this paper to expose techniques and theorems that can be used to establish that many collections of finite sets of equations characterized by common algebraic or logical properties fail to be recursive. The following theorem is typical.

Theorem. In a language provided with an operation symbol of rank at least two, the collection of finite irredundant sets of equations is not recursive.

Theorems of this kind are part of a pattern of research into decision problems in equational logic. This pattern finds its origins in the works of Markov [8] and Post [20] and in Tarski's development of the theory of relation algebras; see Chin [1], Chin and Tarski [2], and Tarski [23]. The papers of Mal′cev [7] and Perkins [16] are more directly connected with the present paper, which includes generalization of much of Perkins' work as well as extensions of a theorem of D. Smith [22]. V. L. Murskii [14] contains some of the results below discovered independently. Not all known results concerning undecidable properties of finite sets of equations seem to be susceptible to the methods presented here. R. McKenzie, for example, shows in [9] that for a language with an operation symbol of rank at least two, the collection of finite sets of equations with nontrivial finite models is not recursive. D. Pigozzi has extended and elaborated the techniques of this paper in [17], [18], and [19] to obtain new results concerning undecidable properties, particularly those of algebraic character.

In [2] Galvin and Hajnal showed, as a corollary to a more general result, that if , is a strong limit cardinal, then . They established similar bounds for powers of singular cardinals of cofinality greater than ω. Jech and Prikry in [3] showed that the Galvin-Hajnal bound can be improved if we assume that ω1 carries an ω2 saturated ω1 complete, nontrivial ideal. (See [7] for definitions), namely: under the given assumption provided is a strong limit cardinal.

In this paper we show that the same conclusion can be derived from Chang's Conjecture (see below) which is, at least consistencywise, a weaker assumption than the existence of an ω2 saturated ideal on ω1. We do not know if assumptions like these are necessary for obtaining the result.

Our notations and terminology should be understood by any reader acquainted with set theory. Chang's Conjecture is the following model theoretic assumption introduced by C. C. Chang:

which is deciphered as follows: Every structure 〈A, R,…〉 in a countable type where ∣A∣ = ω2, R ⊆ A, ∣R∣ = ω1 has an elementary substructure: 〈A′,R′,…〉 where ∣A′∣ = ω1 and ∣R′∣ = ω0. The consistency of Chang's Conjecture modulo the existence of Ramsey cardinals is claimed in [5].

Say that (a, d) is an isolation pair if a is a c.e. degree, d is a d.c.e. degree, a < d and a bounds all c.e. degrees below d. We prove that there are an isolation pair (a, d) and a c.e. degree c such that c is incomparable with a, d, and c cups d to o′, caps a to o. Thus, {o, c, d, o′} is a diamond embedding, which was first proved by Downey in [9]. Furthermore, combined with Harrington-Soare continuity of capping degrees, our result gives an alternative proof of N5 embedding.

We prove that no logic (i.e. consequence operation) determined by any class of orthomodular lattices admits the deduction theorem (Theorem 2.7). We extend those results to some broader class of logics determined by ortholattices (Corollary 2.6).

We discuss the finite-to-one Rudin-Keisler ordering of ultrafilters on the natural numbers, which we baptize the Rudin-Blass ordering in honour of Professor Andreas Blass who worked extensively in the area.

We develop and summarize many of its properties in relation to its bounding and dominating numbers, directedness, and provide applications to continuum theory. In particular, we prove in ZFC alone that there exists an ultrafilter with no Q-point below in the Rudin-Blass ordering.

In this paper we give a constructive proof of the pointfree version of Tychonoff's theorem within formal topology, using ideas from Coquand's proof in [7]. To deal with pointfree topology Coquand uses Johnstone's coverages. Because of the representation theorem in [3], from a mathematical viewpoint these structures are equivalent to formal topologies but there is an essential difference also. Namely, formal topologies have been developed within Martin Löf's constructive type theory (cf. [16]), which thus gives a direct way of formalizing them (cf. [4]).

The most important aspect of our proof is that it is based on an inductive definition of the topological product of formal topologies. This fact allows us to transform Coquand's proof into a proof by structural induction on the last rule applied in a derivation of a cover. The inductive generation of a cover, together with a modification of the inductive property proposed by Coquand, makes it possible to formulate our proof of Tychonoff s theorem in constructive type theory. There is thus a clear difference to earlier localic proofs of Tychonoff's theorem known in the literature (cf. [9, 10, 12, 14, 27]). Indeed we not only avoid to use the axiom of choice, but reach constructiveness in a very strong sense. Namely, our proof of Tychonoff's theorem supplies an algorithm which, given a cover of the product space, computes a finite subcover, provided that there exists a similar algorithm for each component space.

The logics considered here are the propositional Linear Logic and propositional Intuitionistic Linear Logic extended by a knotted structural rule: . It is proved that the class of algebraic models for such a logic has the finite embeddability property, meaning that every finite partial subalgebra of an algebra in the class can be embedded into a finite full algebra in the class. It follows that each such logic has the finite model property with respect to its algebraic semantics and hence that the logic is decidable.

For f, g ∈ ωω let be the minimal number of uniform g-splitting trees (or: Slaloms) to cover the uniform f-splitting tree, i.e., for every branch v of the f-tree, one of the g-trees contains v. is the dual notion: For every branch v, one of the g-trees guesses v(m) infinitely often.

It is consistent that for ℵ1 many pairwise different cardinals κ∊ and suitable pairs (f∊, g∊).

For the proof we use creatures with sufficient bigness and halving. We show that the lim-inf creature forcing satisfies fusion and pure decision. We introduce decisiveness and use it to construct a variant of the countable support iteration of such forcings, which still satisfies fusion and pure decision.

Using possibly infinite computations on universal monotone Turing machines, we prove Martin-Löf randomness in ∅′ of the probability that the output be in some set under complexity assumptions about .

We study thorn forking and rosiness in the context of continuous logic. We prove that the Urysohn sphere is rosy (with respect to finitary imaginaries), providing the first example of an essentially continuous unstable theory with a nice notion of independence. In the process, we show that a real rosy theory which has weak elimination of finitary imaginaries is rosy with respect to finitary imaginaries, a fact which is new even for discrete first-order real rosy theories.

Martin has shown that the notions of ancestral and class-inclusion are sufficient to develop the theory of natural numbers in a system containing variables of only one type.

The purpose of the present paper is to show that an analogous construction is possible in a system containing, beyond the quantificational level, only the ancestral and the ordered pair.

The formulae of our system comprise quantificational schemata and anything which can be obtained therefrom by writing pairs (e.g. (x; y), ((x; y); (x; (y; y))) etc.) for free variables, or by writing ancestral abstracts (e.g. (*xyFxy) etc.) for schematic letters, or both.

The ancestral abstract (*xyFxy) means what is usually meant by ; and the formula (*xyFxy)zw answers to Martin's (zw; xy)(Fxy).

The system presupposes a non-simple applied functional calculus of the first order, with a rule of substitution for predicate letters; over and above this it has three axioms for the ancestral and two for the ordered pair.