Formal systems are mathematical frameworks with precise rules for manipulating symbols. They're crucial for studying logic and foundations of math. and are key concepts, showing how these systems can encode functions and describe concepts.
Proving representability involves constructing formulas that capture specific functions or relations. However, formal systems have limitations in what they can express, as revealed by famous theorems like and .
Formal Systems and Metamathematics
Representability vs expressibility in formal systems
Top images from around the web for Representability vs expressibility in formal systems
A Friendly Introduction to Mathematical Logic - Milne Open Textbooks View original
Is this image relevant?
Gödel's completeness theorem - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Cartesian Worldview – Introduction to History and Philosophy of Science View original
Is this image relevant?
A Friendly Introduction to Mathematical Logic - Milne Open Textbooks View original
Is this image relevant?
Gödel's completeness theorem - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Representability vs expressibility in formal systems
A Friendly Introduction to Mathematical Logic - Milne Open Textbooks View original
Is this image relevant?
Gödel's completeness theorem - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Cartesian Worldview – Introduction to History and Philosophy of Science View original
Is this image relevant?
A Friendly Introduction to Mathematical Logic - Milne Open Textbooks View original
Is this image relevant?
Gödel's completeness theorem - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Representability encodes functions or relations within through formulas corresponding to given function or relation
Expressibility describes concepts within formal system language articulating properties or relationships
Key differences: representability encodes specific functions/relations while expressibility relates to descriptive power of system's language (, Gödel's incompleteness theorems)
Proving representability in formal arithmetic
Primitive recursive functions always representable in formal arithmetic systems like proved by on function complexity
Basic arithmetic operations representable:
Addition: ϕ+(x,y,z)≡z=x+y
Multiplication: ϕ×(x,y,z)≡z=x×y
Relations representable:
Less than: ϕ<(x,y)≡∃z(z=0∧x+z=y)
Equality: ϕ=(x,y)≡x=y
Proof techniques construct formula capturing function/relation, show formula satisfies representability definition, use induction for complex functions
Limitations of formal system expressibility
Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems reveal limitations on and , systems cannot prove own consistency
Tarski's Undefinability Theorem demonstrates arithmetic truth not arithmetically definable, limiting expressibility of semantic concepts
shows limitations on cardinality expressibility in first-order logic
relates computability limits to formal system expressibility
Implications: not all intuitively true statements provable within system, some concepts require stronger/different formal systems to express
Representability for metamathematical statements
encodes metamathematical statements as numbers allowing formal systems to "talk about" own properties
used in self-reference proofs crucial for many metamathematical results
represents provability concept within formal system used to formulate statements about system's proving capabilities
Expressibility of metamathematical concepts includes consistency, completeness, and statements
Computer science applications: relates to expressibility, demonstrates limitations on program analysis