Conservation9=24=99 - CONSERVATION by Harvey M Friedman...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
CONSERVATION by Harvey M. Friedman September 24, 1999 John Burgess has specifically asked about whether one give a finitistic model theoretic proof of certain conservative extension results discussed in [Si99]. Burgess asks this in connection with Hilbert’s program. Specifically, I. WKL 0 is a conservative extension of PRA for -0-2 sentences. II. ACA 0 is a conservative extension of PA for arithmetic sentences. III. ATR 0 is a conservative extension of IR for arithmetic sentences. IV. -1-1-CA 0 is a conservative extension of ID(<omega) for arithmetic sentences. Here IR is Feferman’s IR, which can be taken to be the theory extending PA with new function symbols encoding the Kleene H- sets on each specific initial segment of the ordinal notation system Gamma0. All of these conservative extension results are given model theoretic proofs in [Si99] except for III. The reader is referred to the exposition of my proof in Friedman, MacAloon, Simpson, “A finite combinatorial principle which is equivalent to the 1-consistency of predicative analysis”, 1982, 197-230 in: G. Metakides (ed.), Patras Logic Symposion, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of mathematics, North- Holland, 1982. We write PFA (polynomial function arithmetic) for the system in the language of 0,1,+,x,<, with the usual successor axioms and defining equations, together with induction for all bounded formulas. This is the same as what is called I 0 in the book {HP93] and elsewhere. In [HP93], it is proved that PFA is fully capable of developing finite sequence coding and formalizing syntax. In fact, they devote all of Chapter V, section 3, to this topic, which is entitled “Exponentiation, Coding Sequences and Formalization of Syntax in I 0 .” In the Bibliographic Notes on page 406, they write “A formalization of syntax in I 0 is
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
considered here for the first time, though the ideas on which it is based have been around for some time.” This makes PFA a good vehicle for taking a reverse mathematics point of view towards weak fragments of arithmetic. From this point of view, it is natural to take EFA = exponential function arithmetic to be in the language of PFA, whose axioms are PFA plus the single axiom (forall n)(2 n exists). And we take EFA* to be PFA plus the axiom that asserts that for all n, there is a sequence of integers of length n, starting with 0, where each term is the base 2 exponentiation of the preceding term. Here is what we will do in this note. 1. We isolate a crucial general fact about theories, which we call the Key Lemma. The Key Lemma has an easy model theoretic proof. But the Key Lemma also has a proof using the Criag interpolation theorem for predicate calculus with equality. The interpolation theorem has model theoretic proofs, but it also has a proof theoretic proof using Gentzen’s cut elimination theorem for predicate calculus with equality. The usual proof of the cut elimination theorem with iterated exponential estimates (given by Gentzen) is readily formalized in EFA’. This yields a proof of the interpolation
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 08/05/2011 for the course MATH 366 taught by Professor Joshua during the Fall '08 term at Ohio State.

Page1 / 7

Conservation9=24=99 - CONSERVATION by Harvey M Friedman...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online