This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Gdels Metatheorem (45.17) and the Strong Completeness Theorem for FOTs (46.2) Branden Fitelson 04/12/07 Before getting to the salient proofs, its important to understand Hunters terminology consistent set of WFFs of a first order theory K . For Hunter, is a consistent set of WFFs of K iff there is no WFF A of K such that K A and K A . As a result, this definition of consistent set of WFFs of K implies that K is itself a consistent firstorder theory! That is, an inconsistent first order theory K does not have any consistent sets of WFFs on this definition. This sounds a bit odd, but its crucial for the proofs below. In this handout, I will go through the proper proofs of 45.17 and 46.2. To this end, I will begin with the background ingredients of the proof of 45.17: metatheorem 45.16, and Lemmas 1 and 2. 45.16 . If is a consistent set of closed WFFs of a first order theory K , then has a denumerable model. Proof. Assume is a consistent set of closed WFFs of a first order theory K . Then, by Hunters definition (above), there is no WFF A of K such that K A and K A . Therefore, it follows that the first order theory K + is a consistent first order theory. If K + were inconsistent, then there would have to be a WFF A of K + such that both A and A were theorems of K + . That would imply the existence of an A such that K A and K A , which contradicts Hunters definition of consistent set of WFFs of K . Since K + is a consistent first order theory, it must have a denumerable model [this is implied by theorems 45.1045.14]. Thus, itself has a denumerable model ( is a subset of the set of theorems of K + ). Lemma 1 for 45.17 . If is a consistent set of WFFs of a first order theory K , then is also a consistent set of WFFs of of the first order theory K , where K is the first order theory one gets when one adds denumerably many new constant symbols with an effective enumeration h c 1 ,...c n ,... i to K . Proof. Assume is a consistent set of WFFs of a first order theory K , and assume that K is K with the new constant symbols h c 1 ,...c n ,... i added to it. Now, assume, for reductio , that is an inconsistent set of K . Then, by definition, this means that there is a WFF B of K such that K B and K B . So, since derivations are finite, there is a finite subset such that K B and K B . These derivations in K can be converted into derivations in K , as follows. Let X = Xv i /c i , where v i is the i th variable in our enumeration that does not occur in either of the derivations K B or K B , and c i is the i th constant symbol in our enumeration of new symbols added to K to yield K . Then, = , since and is a set of WFFs of K (and so do not contain any c i s). Moreover, K B and K B . Why? Think about...
View Full
Document
 Spring '07
 FITELSON

Click to edit the document details