Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:26:31.022Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Universal Approach to Self-Referential Paradoxes, Incompleteness and Fixed Points

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 January 2014

Noson S. Yanofsky
Noson S. Yanofsky*
Affiliation:
Department of Computer and Information Science, Brooklyn College, Cuny Brooklyn, N.Y. 11210 Department of Computer Science, The Graduate Center, Cuny 365 Fifth Avenue, New york, N.Y. 10016, E-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Following F. William Lawvere, we show that many self-referential paradoxes, incompleteness theorems and fixed point theorems fall out of the same simple scheme. We demonstrate these similarities by showing how this simple scheme encompasses the semantic paradoxes, and how they arise as diagonal arguments and fixed point theorems in logic, computability theory, complexity theory and formal language theory.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of Symbolic Logic , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , September 2003 , pp. 362 - 386
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2003

References

REFERENCES

[1] Baker, Theodore, Gill, John, and Solovay, Robert, Relativizations of the P =?NP question, SIAM Journal on Computing, vol. 4 (1975), no. 4, pp. 431–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Barwise, Jon (editor), Handbook ofmathematical logic, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1977, With the cooperation of H. J. Keisler, K. Kunen, Y. N. Moschovakis and A. S. Troelstra, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 90.Google Scholar
[3] Brandenburger, Adam, The power of paradox, available at http://www.people.hbs.edu/abrandenburger/paradox-03-12-021.pdf.Google Scholar
[4] Cutland, Nigel, Computability, An introduction to recursive function theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1980.Google Scholar
[5] Fitting, Melvin, Notes on the mathematical aspects of Kripke's theory of truth, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 27 (1986), no. 1, pp. 75–88.Google Scholar
[6] Heller, Alex, An existence theorem for recursion categories, The Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 55 (1990), no. 3, pp. 1252–1268.Google Scholar
[7] Hopcroft, John E. and Ullman, Jeffrey D., Introduction to automata theory, languages, and computation, Addison-Wesley Series in Computer Science, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass., 1979.Google Scholar
[8] Huwig, Hagen and Poigné, Axel, A note on inconsistencies caused by fixpoints in a Cartesian closed category, Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 73 (1990), no. 1, pp. 101–112.Google Scholar
[9] Kanamori, Akihiro and McAloon, Kenneth, On Gödel incompleteness and finite combinatorics, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 33 (1987), no. 1, pp. 23–41.Google Scholar
[10] Lavine, Shaughan, Understanding the infinite, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994.Google Scholar
[11] Lawvere, F. William, Diagonal arguments and cartesian closed categories, Category theory, homology theory and their applications, II (Battelle Institute Conference, Seattle, Wash., 1968), Springer, Berlin, 1969, pp. 134–145.Google Scholar
[12] Lawvere, F. William and Rosebrugh, Robert, Sets for mathematics, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
[13] Lawvere, F. William and Schanuel, Stephen H., Conceptual mathematics, A first introduction to categories, With the assistance of Emilio Faro, Fatima Fenaroli and Danilo Lawvere. Buffalo Workshop Press, Buffalo, NY, 1991.Google Scholar
[14] Lane, Saunders Mac, Categories for the working mathematician, second ed., Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 5, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998.Google Scholar
[15] Manin, Yuri I., Classical computing, quantum computing, and Shor's factoring algorithm, Astérisque, (2000), no. 266, Exp. No. 862, 5, pp. 375–404, Séminaire Bourbaki, Vol. 1998/99.Google Scholar
[16] Mendelson, Elliott, Introduction to mathematical logic, fourth ed., Chapman & Hall, London, 1997.Google Scholar
[17] Mulry, Philip S., Categorical fixed point semantics, Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 70 (1990), no. 1, pp. 85–97, Fourth Workshop on Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics (Boulder, CO, 1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18] Parikh, Rohit, Existence and feasibility in arithmetic, The Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 36 (1971), pp. 494–508.Google Scholar
[19] Pavlović, Duško, On the structure of paradoxes, Archive for Mathematical Logic, vol. 31 (1992), no. 6, pp. 397–406.Google Scholar
[20] Pitts, Andrew M. and Taylor, Paul, A note on Russell's paradox in locally Cartesian closed categories, Studia Logica, vol. 48 (1989), no. 3, pp. 377–387.Google Scholar
[21] Rucker, Rudy, Infinity and the mind: The science and philosophy of the infinite, Birkhäuser, Boston, Mass., 1982.Google Scholar