2 ms·
Along these lines, a book I've seen recommended here: Computability: Turing, Gödel, Church, and Beyond. B. Jack Copeland, Carl J. Posy, Oron Shagrir (2013) MIT
by lioeters 7y ago
Along these lines, a book I've seen recommended here:
Computability: Turing, Gödel, Church, and Beyond. B. Jack Copeland, Carl J. Posy, Oron Shagrir (2013) MIT Press
Description:
In the 1930s a series of seminal works published by Alan Turing, Kurt Gödel, Alonzo Church, and others established the theoretical basis for computability. This work, advancing precise characterizations of effective, algorithmic computability, was the culmination of intensive investigations into the foundations of mathematics. In the decades since, the theory of computability has moved to the center of discussions in philosophy, computer science, and cognitive science. In this volume, distinguished computer scientists, mathematicians, logicians, and philosophers consider the conceptual foundations of computability in light of our modern understanding. Some chapters focus on the pioneering work by Turing, Gödel, and Church, including the Church-Turing thesis and Gödel's response to Church's and Turing's proposals. Other chapters cover more recent technical developments, including computability over the reals, Gödel's influence on mathematical logic and on recursion theory and the impact of work by Turing and Emil Post on our theoretical understanding of online and interactive computing; and others relate computability and complexity to issues in the philosophy of mind, the philosophy of science, and the philosophy of mathematics.
- ProfHewitt 7y agoUsing Orders on propositions, the construction of Gödel’s proposition I'mUnprovable is blocked because the mapping Ψ↦⊬Ψ has no fixed point because ⊬Ψ has order one greater than the order of Ψ since Ψ is a propositional variable. Consequently, some other way had to be devised to prove inferential incompleteness without using Gödel’s proposition I'mUnprovable. A complication is that theorems of strongly-typed theories of the natural numbers and computation are not computationally enumerable because there are uncountable instances of the induction axiom in each theory. However, proof checking is computationally decidable :-) The complication can be overcome using special cases of induction axioms to prove inferential incompleteness of the theories. See the following: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3418003 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3418003