DOCSLIB.ORG

Sets, Logic, Computation the Open Logic Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sets, Logic, Computation the Open Logic Project Sets, Logic, Computation The Open Logic Project Instigator Richard Zach, University of Calgary Editorial Board Aldo Antonelli,y University of California, Davis Andrew Arana, Université Paris I Panthénon–Sorbonne Jeremy Avigad, Carnegie Mellon University Walter Dean, University of Warwick Gillian Russell, University of North Carolina Nicole Wyatt, University of Calgary Audrey Yap, University of Victoria Contributors Samara Burns, University of Calgary Dana Hägg, University of Calgary Sets, Logic, Computation An Open Logic Text Remixed by Richard Zach Winter 2017 The Open Logic Project would like to acknowledge the generous support of the Faculty of Arts and the Taylor Institute of Teaching and Learning of the University of Calgary. This resource was funded by the Alberta Open Educational Re- sources (ABOER) Initiative, which is made possible through an investment from the Alberta government. Illustrations by Matthew Leadbeater, used under a Creative Com- mons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Typeset in Baskervald X and Universalis ADF Standard by LATEX. This version of phil379 is revision f7344c9 (2017-07-18), with content generated from OpenLogicProject revision 977ec76 (2017- 07-18). Sets, Logic, Computation by Richard Zach is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Interna- tional License. It is based on The Open Logic Text by the Open Logic Project, used under a Creative Commons At- tribution 4.0 International License. Contents Preface xiii I Sets, Relations, Functions 1 1 Sets 2 1.1 Basics . 2 1.2 Some Important Sets . 4 1.3 Subsets . 5 1.4 Unions and Intersections . 6 1.5 Pairs, Tuples, Cartesian Products . 9 1.6 Russell’s Paradox . 11 Summary . 12 Problems . 13 2 Relations 14 2.1 Relations as Sets . 14 2.2 Special Properties of Relations . 16 2.3 Orders . 18 2.4 Graphs . 21 2.5 Operations on Relations . 22 Summary . 23 Problems . 24 v vi CONTENTS 3 Functions 26 3.1 Basics . 26 3.2 Kinds of Functions . 28 3.3 Inverses of Functions . 30 3.4 Composition of Functions . 31 3.5 Isomorphism . 32 3.6 Partial Functions . 33 3.7 Functions and Relations . 34 Summary . 34 Problems . 35 4 The Size of Sets 37 4.1 Introduction . 37 4.2 Countable Sets . 37 4.3 Uncountable Sets . 43 4.4 Reduction . 47 4.5 Equinumerous Sets . 48 4.6 Comparing Sizes of Sets . 50 Summary . 52 Problems . 53 II First-order Logic 57 5 Syntax and Semantics 58 5.1 Introduction . 58 5.2 First-Order Languages . 60 5.3 Terms and Formulas . 62 5.4 Unique Readability . 65 5.5 Main operator of a Formula . 69 5.6 Subformulas . 70 5.7 Free Variables and Sentences . 72 5.8 Substitution . 73 5.9 Structures for First-order Languages . 75 5.10 Covered Structures for First-order Languages . 77 5.11 Satisfaction of a Formula in a Structure . 79 CONTENTS vii 5.12 Variable Assignments . 84 5.13 Extensionality . 88 5.14 Semantic Notions . 90 Summary . 93 Problems . 94 6 Theories and Their Models 97 6.1 Introduction . 97 6.2 Expressing Properties of Structures . 100 6.3 Examples of First-Order Theories . 101 6.4 Expressing Relations in a Structure . 104 6.5 The Theory of Sets . 106 6.6 Expressing the Size of Structures . 109 Summary . 111 Problems . 111 7 Natural Deduction 113 7.1 Introduction . 113 7.2 Rules and Derivations . 115 7.3 Examples of Derivations . 118 7.4 Proof-Theoretic Notions . 127 7.5 Properties of Derivability . 130 7.6 Soundness . 135 7.7 Derivations with Identity predicate . 140 7.8 Soundness with Identity predicate . 142 Summary . 143 Problems . 143 8 The Completeness Theorem 145 8.1 Introduction . 145 8.2 Outline of the Proof . 146 8.3 Complete Consistent Sets of Sentences . 149 8.4 Henkin Expansion . 151 8.5 Lindenbaum’s Lemma . 153 8.6 Construction of a Model . 154 8.7 Identity . 157 viii CONTENTS 8.8 The Completeness Theorem . 160 8.9 The Compactness Theorem . 161 8.10 A Direct Proof of the Compactness Theorem . 164 8.11 The Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem . 166 Summary . 167 Problems . 168 9 Beyond First-order Logic 170 9.1 Overview . 170 9.2 Many-Sorted Logic . 171 9.3 Second-Order logic . 173 9.4 Higher-Order logic . 178 9.5 Intuitionistic Logic . 181 9.6 Modal Logics . 187 9.7 Other Logics . 189 III Turing Machines 193 10 Turing Machine Computations 194 10.1 Introduction . 194 10.2 Representing Turing Machines . 197 10.3 Turing Machines . 202 10.4 Configurations and Computations . 203 10.5 Unary Representation of Numbers . 205 10.6 Halting States . 206 10.7 Combining Turing Machines . 207 10.8 Variants of Turing Machines . 209 10.9 The Church-Turing Thesis . 211 Summary . 212 Problems . 213 11 Undecidability 215 11.1 Introduction . 215 11.2 Enumerating Turing Machines . 217 11.3 The Halting Problem . 219 CONTENTS ix 11.4 The Decision Problem . 221 11.5 Representing Turing Machines . 222 11.6 Verifying the Representation . 226 11.7 The Decision Problem is Unsolvable . 233 Summary . 233 Problems . 234 A Proofs 237 A.1 Introduction . 237 A.2 Starting a Proof . 239 A.3 Using Definitions . 239 A.4 Inference Patterns . 241 A.5 An Example . 248 A.6 Another Example . 253 A.7 Indirect Proof . 255 A.8 Reading Proofs . 259 A.9 I can’t do it! . 261 A.10 Other Resources . 263 Problems . 263 B Induction 265 B.1 Introduction . 265 B.2 Induction on N . 266 B.3 Strong Induction . 269 B.4 Inductive Definitions . 270 B.5 Structural Induction . 273 C Biographies 275 C.1 Georg Cantor . 275 C.2 Alonzo Church . 276 C.3 Gerhard Gentzen . 277 C.4 Kurt Gödel . 279 C.5 Emmy Noether . 281 C.6 Bertrand Russell . 282 C.7 Alfred Tarski . 284 C.8 Alan Turing . 285 x CONTENTS C.9 Ernst Zermelo . 287 Glossary 291 Photo Credits 297 Bibliography 299 About the Open Logic Project 304 Preface This book is an introduction to meta-logic, aimed especially at students of computer science and philosophy. “Meta-logic” is so- called because it is the discipline that studies logic itself. Logic proper is concerned with canons of valid inference, and its sym- bolic or formal version presents these canons using formal lan- guages, such as those of propositional and predicate, a.k.a., first- order logic. Meta-logic investigates the properties of these lan- guage, and of the canons of correct inference that use them. It studies topics such as how to give precise meaning to the ex- pressions of these formal languages, how to justify the canons of valid inference, what the properties of various proof systems are, including their computational properties. These questions are important and interesting in their own right, because the lan- guages and proof systems investigated are applied in many dier- ent areas—in mathematics, philosophy, computer science, and linguistics, especially—but they also serve as examples of how to study formal systems in general. The logical languages we study here are not the only ones people are interested in. For instance, linguists and philosophers are interested in languages that are much more complicated than those of propositional and first-order logic, and computer scientists are interested in other kinds of languages altogether, such as programming languages. And the methods we discuss here—how to give semantics for for- mal languages, how to prove results about formal languages, how xiii xiv PREFACE to investigate the properties of formal languages—are applicable in those cases as well. Like any discipline, meta-logic both has a set of results or facts, and a store of methods and techniques, and this text cov- ers both. Some students won’t need to know some of the results we discuss outside of this course, but they will need and use the methods we use to establish them. The Löwenheim-Skolem the- orem, say, does not often make an appearance in computer sci- ence, but the methods we use to prove it do. On the other hand, many of the results we discuss do have relevance for certain de- bates, say, in the philosophy of science and in metaphysics. Phi- losophy students may not need to be able to prove these results outside this course, but they do need to understand what the results are—and you really only understand these results if you have thought through the definitions and proofs needed to es- tablish them. These.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Partial Function Computed by a TM M(W)
    CS601 The Partial Function Computed by a TM Lecture 2 8 y if M on input “.w ” eventually <> t M(w) halts with output “.y ” ≡ t :> otherwise % Σ Σ .; ; Usually, Σ = 0; 1 ; w; y Σ? 0 ≡ − f tg 0 f g 2 0 Definition 2.1 Let f :Σ? Σ? be a total or partial function. We 0 ! 0 say that f is a partial, recursive function iff TM M(f = M( )), 9 · i.e., w Σ?(f(w) = M(w)). 8 2 0 Remark 2.2 There is an easy to compute 1:1 and onto map be- tween 0; 1 ? and N [Exercise]. Thus we can think of the contents f g of a TM tape as a natural number and talk about f : N N ! being a recursive function. If the partial, recursive function f is total, i.e., f : N N then we ! say that f is a total, recursive function. A partial function that is not total is called strictly partial. 1 CS601 Some Recursive Functions Lecture 2 Proposition 2.3 The following functions are recursive. They are all total except for peven. copy(w) = ww σ(n) = n + 1 plus(n; m) = n + m mult(n; m) = n m × exp(n; m) = nm (we let exp(0; 0) = 1) 1 if n is even χ (n) = even 0 otherwise 1 if n is even p (n) = even otherwise % Proof: Exercise: please convince yourself that you can build TMs to compute all of these functions! 2 Recursive Sets = Decidable Sets = Computable Sets Definition 2.4 Let S Σ? or S N.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Structures: Sets, Functions, Sequences, and Sums 2-2
    CHAPTER Basic Structures: Sets, Functions, 2 Sequences, and Sums 2.1 Sets uch of discrete mathematics is devoted to the study of discrete structures, used to represent discrete objects. Many important discrete structures are built using sets, which 2.2 Set Operations M are collections of objects. Among the discrete structures built from sets are combinations, 2.3 Functions unordered collections of objects used extensively in counting; relations, sets of ordered pairs that represent relationships between objects; graphs, sets of vertices and edges that connect 2.4 Sequences and vertices; and finite state machines, used to model computing machines. These are some of the Summations topics we will study in later chapters. The concept of a function is extremely important in discrete mathematics. A function assigns to each element of a set exactly one element of a set. Functions play important roles throughout discrete mathematics. They are used to represent the computational complexity of algorithms, to study the size of sets, to count objects, and in a myriad of other ways. Useful structures such as sequences and strings are special types of functions. In this chapter, we will introduce the notion of a sequence, which represents ordered lists of elements. We will introduce some important types of sequences, and we will address the problem of identifying a pattern for the terms of a sequence from its first few terms. Using the notion of a sequence, we will define what it means for a set to be countable, namely, that we can list all the elements of the set in a sequence.
    [Show full text]
  • I0 and Rank-Into-Rank Axioms
    I0 and rank-into-rank axioms Vincenzo Dimonte∗ July 11, 2017 Abstract Just a survey on I0. Keywords: Large cardinals; Axiom I0; rank-into-rank axioms; elemen- tary embeddings; relative constructibility; embedding lifting; singular car- dinals combinatorics. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classifications: 03E55 (03E05 03E35 03E45) 1 Informal Introduction to the Introduction Ok, that’s it. People who know me also know that it is years that I am ranting about a book about I0, how it is important to write it and publish it, etc. I realized that this particular moment is still right for me to write it, for two reasons: time is scarce, and probably there are still not enough results (or anyway not enough different lines of research). This has the potential of being a very nasty vicious circle: there are not enough results about I0 to write a book, but if nobody writes a book the diffusion of I0 is too limited, and so the number of results does not increase much. To avoid this deadlock, I decided to divulge a first draft of such a hypothetical book, hoping to start a “conversation” with that. It is literally a first draft, so it is full of errors and in a liquid state. For example, I still haven’t decided whether to call it I0 or I0, both notations are used in literature. I feel like it still lacks a vision of the future, a map on where the research could and should going about I0. Many proofs are old but never published, and therefore reconstructed by me, so maybe they are wrong.
    [Show full text]
  • Iris: Monoids and Invariants As an Orthogonal Basis for Concurrent Reasoning
    Iris: Monoids and Invariants as an Orthogonal Basis for Concurrent Reasoning Ralf Jung David Swasey Filip Sieczkowski Kasper Svendsen MPI-SWS & MPI-SWS Aarhus University Aarhus University Saarland University [email protected] fi[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] rtifact * Comple * Aaron Turon Lars Birkedal Derek Dreyer A t te n * te A is W s E * e n l l C o L D C o P * * Mozilla Research Aarhus University MPI-SWS c u e m s O E u e e P n R t v e o d t * y * s E a [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] a l d u e a t Abstract TaDA [8], and others. In this paper, we present a logic called Iris that We present Iris, a concurrent separation logic with a simple premise: explains some of the complexities of these prior separation logics in monoids and invariants are all you need. Partial commutative terms of a simpler unifying foundation, while also supporting some monoids enable us to express—and invariants enable us to enforce— new and powerful reasoning principles for concurrency. user-defined protocols on shared state, which are at the conceptual Before we get to Iris, however, let us begin with a brief overview core of most recent program logics for concurrency. Furthermore, of some key problems that arise in reasoning compositionally about through a novel extension of the concept of a view shift, Iris supports shared state, and how prior approaches have dealt with them.
    [Show full text]
  • Domain and Range of a Function
    4.1 Domain and Range of a Function How can you fi nd the domain and range of STATES a function? STANDARDS MA.8.A.1.1 MA.8.A.1.5 1 ACTIVITY: The Domain and Range of a Function Work with a partner. The table shows the number of adult and child tickets sold for a school concert. Input Number of Adult Tickets, x 01234 Output Number of Child Tickets, y 86420 The variables x and y are related by the linear equation 4x + 2y = 16. a. Write the equation in function form by solving for y. b. The domain of a function is the set of all input values. Find the domain of the function. Domain = Why is x = 5 not in the domain of the function? 1 Why is x = — not in the domain of the function? 2 c. The range of a function is the set of all output values. Find the range of the function. Range = d. Functions can be described in many ways. ● by an equation ● by an input-output table y 9 ● in words 8 ● by a graph 7 6 ● as a set of ordered pairs 5 4 Use the graph to write the function 3 as a set of ordered pairs. 2 1 , , ( , ) ( , ) 0 09321 45 876 x ( , ) , ( , ) , ( , ) 148 Chapter 4 Functions 2 ACTIVITY: Finding Domains and Ranges Work with a partner. ● Copy and complete each input-output table. ● Find the domain and range of the function represented by the table. 1 a. y = −3x + 4 b. y = — x − 6 2 x −2 −10 1 2 x 01234 y y c.
    [Show full text]
  • Enumerations of the Kolmogorov Function
    Enumerations of the Kolmogorov Function Richard Beigela Harry Buhrmanb Peter Fejerc Lance Fortnowd Piotr Grabowskie Luc Longpr´ef Andrej Muchnikg Frank Stephanh Leen Torenvlieti Abstract A recursive enumerator for a function h is an algorithm f which enu- merates for an input x finitely many elements including h(x). f is a aEmail: [email protected]. Department of Computer and Information Sciences, Temple University, 1805 North Broad Street, Philadelphia PA 19122, USA. Research per- formed in part at NEC and the Institute for Advanced Study. Supported in part by a State of New Jersey grant and by the National Science Foundation under grants CCR-0049019 and CCR-9877150. bEmail: [email protected]. CWI, Kruislaan 413, 1098SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Partially supported by the EU through the 5th framework program FET. cEmail: [email protected]. Department of Computer Science, University of Mas- sachusetts Boston, Boston, MA 02125, USA. dEmail: [email protected]. Department of Computer Science, University of Chicago, 1100 East 58th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, USA. Research performed in part at NEC Research Institute. eEmail: [email protected]. Institut f¨ur Informatik, Im Neuenheimer Feld 294, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany. fEmail: [email protected]. Computer Science Department, UTEP, El Paso, TX 79968, USA. gEmail: [email protected]. Institute of New Techologies, Nizhnyaya Radi- shevskaya, 10, Moscow, 109004, Russia. The work was partially supported by Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grants N 04-01-00427, N 02-01-22001) and Council on Grants for Scientific Schools. hEmail: [email protected]. School of Computing and Department of Mathe- matics, National University of Singapore, 3 Science Drive 2, Singapore 117543, Republic of Singapore.
    [Show full text]
  • Adaptive Lower Bound for Testing Monotonicity on the Line
    Adaptive Lower Bound for Testing Monotonicity on the Line Aleksandrs Belovs∗ Abstract In the property testing model, the task is to distinguish objects possessing some property from the objects that are far from it. One of such properties is monotonicity, when the objects are functions from one poset to another. This is an active area of research. In this paper we study query complexity of ε-testing monotonicity of a function f :[n] → [r]. All our lower bounds are for adaptive two-sided testers. log r • We prove a nearly tight lower bound for this problem in terms of r. TheboundisΩ log log r when ε =1/2. No previous satisfactory lower bound in terms of r was known. • We completely characterise query complexity of this problem in terms of n for smaller values of ε. The complexity is Θ ε−1 log(εn) . Apart from giving the lower bound, this improves on the best known upper bound. Finally, we give an alternative proof of the Ω(ε−1d log n−ε−1 log ε−1) lower bound for testing monotonicity on the hypergrid [n]d due to Chakrabarty and Seshadhri (RANDOM’13). 1 Introduction The framework of property testing was formulated by Rubinfeld and Sudan [19] and Goldreich et al. [16]. A property testing problem is specified by a property P, which is a class of functions mapping some finite set D into some finite set R, and proximity parameter ε, which is a real number between 0 and 1. An ε-tester is a bounded-error randomised query algorithm which, given oracle access to a function f : D → R, distinguishes between the case when f belongs to P and the case when f is ε-far from P.
    [Show full text]
  • Elementary Functions Part 1, Functions Lecture 1.6D, Function Inverses: One-To-One and Onto Functions
    Elementary Functions Part 1, Functions Lecture 1.6d, Function Inverses: One-to-one and onto functions Dr. Ken W. Smith Sam Houston State University 2013 Smith (SHSU) Elementary Functions 2013 26 / 33 Function Inverses When does a function f have an inverse? It turns out that there are two critical properties necessary for a function f to be invertible. The function needs to be \one-to-one" and \onto". Smith (SHSU) Elementary Functions 2013 27 / 33 Function Inverses When does a function f have an inverse? It turns out that there are two critical properties necessary for a function f to be invertible. The function needs to be \one-to-one" and \onto". Smith (SHSU) Elementary Functions 2013 27 / 33 Function Inverses When does a function f have an inverse? It turns out that there are two critical properties necessary for a function f to be invertible. The function needs to be \one-to-one" and \onto". Smith (SHSU) Elementary Functions 2013 27 / 33 Function Inverses When does a function f have an inverse? It turns out that there are two critical properties necessary for a function f to be invertible. The function needs to be \one-to-one" and \onto". Smith (SHSU) Elementary Functions 2013 27 / 33 One-to-one functions* A function like f(x) = x2 maps two different inputs, x = −5 and x = 5, to the same output, y = 25. But with a one-to-one function no pair of inputs give the same output. Here is a function we saw earlier. This function is not one-to-one since both the inputs x = 2 and x = 3 give the output y = C: Smith (SHSU) Elementary Functions 2013 28 / 33 One-to-one functions* A function like f(x) = x2 maps two different inputs, x = −5 and x = 5, to the same output, y = 25.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Concepts of Set Theory, Functions and Relations 1. Basic
    Ling 310, adapted from UMass Ling 409, Partee lecture notes March 1, 2006 p. 1 Basic Concepts of Set Theory, Functions and Relations 1. Basic Concepts of Set Theory........................................................................................................................1 1.1. Sets and elements ...................................................................................................................................1 1.2. Specification of sets ...............................................................................................................................2 1.3. Identity and cardinality ..........................................................................................................................3 1.4. Subsets ...................................................................................................................................................4 1.5. Power sets .............................................................................................................................................4 1.6. Operations on sets: union, intersection...................................................................................................4 1.7 More operations on sets: difference, complement...................................................................................5 1.8. Set-theoretic equalities ...........................................................................................................................5 Chapter 2. Relations and Functions ..................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Division by Zero in Logic and Computing Jan Bergstra
    Division by Zero in Logic and Computing Jan Bergstra To cite this version: Jan Bergstra. Division by Zero in Logic and Computing. 2021. hal-03184956v2 HAL Id: hal-03184956 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03184956v2 Preprint submitted on 19 Apr 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. DIVISION BY ZERO IN LOGIC AND COMPUTING JAN A. BERGSTRA Abstract. The phenomenon of division by zero is considered from the per- spectives of logic and informatics respectively. Division rather than multi- plicative inverse is taken as the point of departure. A classification of views on division by zero is proposed: principled, physics based principled, quasi- principled, curiosity driven, pragmatic, and ad hoc. A survey is provided of different perspectives on the value of 1=0 with for each view an assessment view from the perspectives of logic and computing. No attempt is made to survey the long and diverse history of the subject. 1. Introduction In the context of rational numbers the constants 0 and 1 and the operations of addition ( + ) and subtraction ( − ) as well as multiplication ( · ) and division ( = ) play a key role. When starting with a binary primitive for subtraction unary opposite is an abbreviation as follows: −x = 0 − x, and given a two-place division function unary inverse is an abbreviation as follows: x−1 = 1=x.
    [Show full text]
  • Module 1 Lecture Notes
    Module 1 Lecture Notes Contents 1.1 Identifying Functions.............................1 1.2 Algebraically Determining the Domain of a Function..........4 1.3 Evaluating Functions.............................6 1.4 Function Operations..............................7 1.5 The Difference Quotient...........................9 1.6 Applications of Function Operations.................... 10 1.7 Determining the Domain and Range of a Function Graphically.... 12 1.8 Reading the Graph of a Function...................... 14 1.1 Identifying Functions In previous classes, you should have studied a variety basic functions. For example, 1 p f(x) = 3x − 5; g(x) = 2x2 − 1; h(x) = ; j(x) = 5x + 2 x − 5 We will begin this course by studying functions and their properties. As the course progresses, we will study inverse, composite, exponential, logarithmic, polynomial and rational functions. Math 111 Module 1 Lecture Notes Definition 1: A relation is a correspondence between two variables. A relation can be ex- pressed through a set of ordered pairs, a graph, a table, or an equation. A set containing ordered pairs (x; y) defines y as a function of x if and only if no two ordered pairs in the set have the same x-coordinate. In other words, every input maps to exactly one output. We write y = f(x) and say \y is a function of x." For the function defined by y = f(x), • x is the independent variable (also known as the input) • y is the dependent variable (also known as the output) • f is the function name Example 1: Determine whether or not each of the following represents a function. Table 1.1 Chicken Name Egg Color Emma Turquoise Hazel Light Brown George(ia) Chocolate Brown Isabella White Yvonne Light Brown (a) The set of ordered pairs of the form (chicken name, egg color) shown in Table 1.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Division by Zero: a Survey of Options
    Division by Zero: A Survey of Options Jan A. Bergstra Informatics Institute, University of Amsterdam Science Park, 904, 1098 XH, Amsterdam, The Netherlands [email protected], [email protected] Submitted: 12 May 2019 Revised: 24 June 2019 Abstract The idea that, as opposed to the conventional viewpoint, division by zero may produce a meaningful result, is long standing and has attracted inter- est from many sides. We provide a survey of some options for defining an outcome for the application of division in case the second argument equals zero. The survey is limited by a combination of simplifying assumptions which are grouped together in the idea of a premeadow, which generalises the notion of an associative transfield. 1 Introduction The number of options available for assigning a meaning to the expression 1=0 is remarkably large. In order to provide an informative survey of such options some conditions may be imposed, thereby reducing the number of options. I will understand an option for division by zero as an arithmetical datatype, i.e. an algebra, with the following signature: • a single sort with name V , • constants 0 (zero) and 1 (one) for sort V , • 2-place functions · (multiplication) and + (addition), • unary functions − (additive inverse, also called opposite) and −1 (mul- tiplicative inverse), • 2 place functions − (subtraction) and = (division). Decimal notations like 2; 17; −8 are used as abbreviations, e.g. 2 = 1 + 1, and −3 = −((1 + 1) + 1). With inverse the multiplicative inverse is meant, while the additive inverse is referred to as opposite. 1 This signature is referred to as the signature of meadows ΣMd in [6], with the understanding that both inverse and division (and both opposite and sub- traction) are present.
    [Show full text]