What does it mean for a set of L-sentences $Sigma$ to be computable?
I was reading these notes and found the definition of computable set of L-sentences (page 101 paper pdf):
$$ ulcorner Sigma urcorner = { ulcorner sigmaurcorner : sigma in Sigma }$$
where $ulcorner varphiurcorner$ is the Godel number of $varphi$. The notes say:
call $Sigma$ computable if $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable.
However, they have only defined what computable means for the Godel numbers of symbols (and not for sets) so I don't know what this means. We can take the definition of computable that given an input the output is a returned in finite time. Note that at this point we have NOT defined recursively enumerable in the notes (nor computably generated which are synonyms), so I am not confusing them (yet) since I'm not suppose to know about them at this point in the text.
What confuses me is that I know how to compute the Godel number of symbols, L-terms, L-formulas but not of a set. So what exactly is the Godel number of a set of L-sentences?
I recently asked a very related question and noticed I had no chance in understanding it without this clarification:
What is the difference between computably generated and computable?
logic predicate-logic computability
|
show 4 more comments
I was reading these notes and found the definition of computable set of L-sentences (page 101 paper pdf):
$$ ulcorner Sigma urcorner = { ulcorner sigmaurcorner : sigma in Sigma }$$
where $ulcorner varphiurcorner$ is the Godel number of $varphi$. The notes say:
call $Sigma$ computable if $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable.
However, they have only defined what computable means for the Godel numbers of symbols (and not for sets) so I don't know what this means. We can take the definition of computable that given an input the output is a returned in finite time. Note that at this point we have NOT defined recursively enumerable in the notes (nor computably generated which are synonyms), so I am not confusing them (yet) since I'm not suppose to know about them at this point in the text.
What confuses me is that I know how to compute the Godel number of symbols, L-terms, L-formulas but not of a set. So what exactly is the Godel number of a set of L-sentences?
I recently asked a very related question and noticed I had no chance in understanding it without this clarification:
What is the difference between computably generated and computable?
logic predicate-logic computability
1
A subset of $mathbb N$ is computable if its characteristic function is recursive. (i.e. there is an effective procedure for deciding if a number is an element or not). This is a special case of a computable relation (arity 1).
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:16
1
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by 'computable symbols'... that doesn't make sense as far as I know. They've presumably defined computable functions and computable relations. They've defined the Godel number of a sentence / formula (probably based on a notion of a Godel number for a symbol), and $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of the sentences in $Sigma$, so a subset of $mathbb N,$ and thus it makes sense to ask if it's computable in the above sense.
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:33
Do you understand what a computable set of natural numbers is? (Note that $ulcorner Sigmaurcorner$ is just a set of natural numbers - namely, the set of Godel numbers of things in $Sigma$ - so that's all that's going on here.)
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 4:53
@spaceisdarkgreen so are you saying to treat $ulcorner Sigma urcorner $ as a characteristic function? I think I do understand what the characteristic function being computable is (just that in finite time we know if an element if part of the relation set or not). So what he means is that $chi_{ulcorner Sigma urcorner }(sigma)$ is computable? i.e. given an L-sentence we can decide in finite time if its Godel number is in the set or not?
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:10
@spaceisdarkgreen sorry I was a bit informal with the "computable symbols", for computable symbols I meant that their Godel numbers are computable.
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:11
|
show 4 more comments
I was reading these notes and found the definition of computable set of L-sentences (page 101 paper pdf):
$$ ulcorner Sigma urcorner = { ulcorner sigmaurcorner : sigma in Sigma }$$
where $ulcorner varphiurcorner$ is the Godel number of $varphi$. The notes say:
call $Sigma$ computable if $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable.
However, they have only defined what computable means for the Godel numbers of symbols (and not for sets) so I don't know what this means. We can take the definition of computable that given an input the output is a returned in finite time. Note that at this point we have NOT defined recursively enumerable in the notes (nor computably generated which are synonyms), so I am not confusing them (yet) since I'm not suppose to know about them at this point in the text.
What confuses me is that I know how to compute the Godel number of symbols, L-terms, L-formulas but not of a set. So what exactly is the Godel number of a set of L-sentences?
I recently asked a very related question and noticed I had no chance in understanding it without this clarification:
What is the difference between computably generated and computable?
logic predicate-logic computability
I was reading these notes and found the definition of computable set of L-sentences (page 101 paper pdf):
$$ ulcorner Sigma urcorner = { ulcorner sigmaurcorner : sigma in Sigma }$$
where $ulcorner varphiurcorner$ is the Godel number of $varphi$. The notes say:
call $Sigma$ computable if $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable.
However, they have only defined what computable means for the Godel numbers of symbols (and not for sets) so I don't know what this means. We can take the definition of computable that given an input the output is a returned in finite time. Note that at this point we have NOT defined recursively enumerable in the notes (nor computably generated which are synonyms), so I am not confusing them (yet) since I'm not suppose to know about them at this point in the text.
What confuses me is that I know how to compute the Godel number of symbols, L-terms, L-formulas but not of a set. So what exactly is the Godel number of a set of L-sentences?
I recently asked a very related question and noticed I had no chance in understanding it without this clarification:
What is the difference between computably generated and computable?
logic predicate-logic computability
logic predicate-logic computability
edited Dec 1 at 16:08
asked Dec 1 at 3:03
Pinocchio
1,88021754
1,88021754
1
A subset of $mathbb N$ is computable if its characteristic function is recursive. (i.e. there is an effective procedure for deciding if a number is an element or not). This is a special case of a computable relation (arity 1).
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:16
1
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by 'computable symbols'... that doesn't make sense as far as I know. They've presumably defined computable functions and computable relations. They've defined the Godel number of a sentence / formula (probably based on a notion of a Godel number for a symbol), and $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of the sentences in $Sigma$, so a subset of $mathbb N,$ and thus it makes sense to ask if it's computable in the above sense.
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:33
Do you understand what a computable set of natural numbers is? (Note that $ulcorner Sigmaurcorner$ is just a set of natural numbers - namely, the set of Godel numbers of things in $Sigma$ - so that's all that's going on here.)
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 4:53
@spaceisdarkgreen so are you saying to treat $ulcorner Sigma urcorner $ as a characteristic function? I think I do understand what the characteristic function being computable is (just that in finite time we know if an element if part of the relation set or not). So what he means is that $chi_{ulcorner Sigma urcorner }(sigma)$ is computable? i.e. given an L-sentence we can decide in finite time if its Godel number is in the set or not?
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:10
@spaceisdarkgreen sorry I was a bit informal with the "computable symbols", for computable symbols I meant that their Godel numbers are computable.
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:11
|
show 4 more comments
1
A subset of $mathbb N$ is computable if its characteristic function is recursive. (i.e. there is an effective procedure for deciding if a number is an element or not). This is a special case of a computable relation (arity 1).
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:16
1
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by 'computable symbols'... that doesn't make sense as far as I know. They've presumably defined computable functions and computable relations. They've defined the Godel number of a sentence / formula (probably based on a notion of a Godel number for a symbol), and $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of the sentences in $Sigma$, so a subset of $mathbb N,$ and thus it makes sense to ask if it's computable in the above sense.
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:33
Do you understand what a computable set of natural numbers is? (Note that $ulcorner Sigmaurcorner$ is just a set of natural numbers - namely, the set of Godel numbers of things in $Sigma$ - so that's all that's going on here.)
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 4:53
@spaceisdarkgreen so are you saying to treat $ulcorner Sigma urcorner $ as a characteristic function? I think I do understand what the characteristic function being computable is (just that in finite time we know if an element if part of the relation set or not). So what he means is that $chi_{ulcorner Sigma urcorner }(sigma)$ is computable? i.e. given an L-sentence we can decide in finite time if its Godel number is in the set or not?
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:10
@spaceisdarkgreen sorry I was a bit informal with the "computable symbols", for computable symbols I meant that their Godel numbers are computable.
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:11
1
1
A subset of $mathbb N$ is computable if its characteristic function is recursive. (i.e. there is an effective procedure for deciding if a number is an element or not). This is a special case of a computable relation (arity 1).
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:16
A subset of $mathbb N$ is computable if its characteristic function is recursive. (i.e. there is an effective procedure for deciding if a number is an element or not). This is a special case of a computable relation (arity 1).
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:16
1
1
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by 'computable symbols'... that doesn't make sense as far as I know. They've presumably defined computable functions and computable relations. They've defined the Godel number of a sentence / formula (probably based on a notion of a Godel number for a symbol), and $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of the sentences in $Sigma$, so a subset of $mathbb N,$ and thus it makes sense to ask if it's computable in the above sense.
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:33
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by 'computable symbols'... that doesn't make sense as far as I know. They've presumably defined computable functions and computable relations. They've defined the Godel number of a sentence / formula (probably based on a notion of a Godel number for a symbol), and $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of the sentences in $Sigma$, so a subset of $mathbb N,$ and thus it makes sense to ask if it's computable in the above sense.
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:33
Do you understand what a computable set of natural numbers is? (Note that $ulcorner Sigmaurcorner$ is just a set of natural numbers - namely, the set of Godel numbers of things in $Sigma$ - so that's all that's going on here.)
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 4:53
Do you understand what a computable set of natural numbers is? (Note that $ulcorner Sigmaurcorner$ is just a set of natural numbers - namely, the set of Godel numbers of things in $Sigma$ - so that's all that's going on here.)
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 4:53
@spaceisdarkgreen so are you saying to treat $ulcorner Sigma urcorner $ as a characteristic function? I think I do understand what the characteristic function being computable is (just that in finite time we know if an element if part of the relation set or not). So what he means is that $chi_{ulcorner Sigma urcorner }(sigma)$ is computable? i.e. given an L-sentence we can decide in finite time if its Godel number is in the set or not?
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:10
@spaceisdarkgreen so are you saying to treat $ulcorner Sigma urcorner $ as a characteristic function? I think I do understand what the characteristic function being computable is (just that in finite time we know if an element if part of the relation set or not). So what he means is that $chi_{ulcorner Sigma urcorner }(sigma)$ is computable? i.e. given an L-sentence we can decide in finite time if its Godel number is in the set or not?
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:10
@spaceisdarkgreen sorry I was a bit informal with the "computable symbols", for computable symbols I meant that their Godel numbers are computable.
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:11
@spaceisdarkgreen sorry I was a bit informal with the "computable symbols", for computable symbols I meant that their Godel numbers are computable.
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:11
|
show 4 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
An important convention that, unfortunately, often goes un-stated is that when an operation that ordinarily only applies to objects of a certain sort is applied to a set of objects of that sort, the result is the set obtained by applying that operation to the elements of that set. For example, multiplication by $2$ is an operation usually applied only to numbers. $mathbb{Z}$ is the set of all integers, so in particular is not a number but a set of numbers. The expression $2mathbb{Z}$, therefore, doesn't really make sense - we don't know what it means to multiply a set by a number. Instead, what we mean by "$2mathbb{Z}$" is ${2x mid x in mathbb{Z}}$ - in this case, the set of all even integers.
Likewise, you're right that the Godel-numbering operation typically applies only to sentences. $Sigma$ is a set of sentences; therefore, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ refers to the set ${ulcornervarphiurcornermidvarphiinSigma}$. In other words, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of sentences in $Sigma$.
Now, you say you know what it means for a Godel number to be computable. If that's the case, either you're misunderstanding something or you're mis-stating something - a single Godel number is always computable, because it's just an integer. Any integer can be computed (by a program which just outputs that number). What you almost certainly mean is that you know what it means for a set of Godel numbers to be computable - that is, there is an algorithm which, given a Godel number, will determine whether or not that number is in the set. If I'm correct in thinking that, then this notion of "computable" is specifically for things like $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ (sets of Godel numbers).
Note that the OP's text does state explicitly that $ulcornerSigmaurcorner={ulcornervarphiurcorner:varphiinSigma}$.
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 17:11
add a comment |
If we have a set of Godel numbers for their L-sentences then we have:
$$ ulcorner Sigma urcorner = { ulcorner sigma urcorner : sigma in Sigma }$$
what the notes define is that $Sigma $ is computable (i.e. we can determine if a specific L-sentence is a member of that set in finite time) if its corresponding "Godel number set" $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. can we determine if a specific natural number corresponds to Godel number that corresponds to a sentence). Thats the meaning.
Basically to check membership for $Sigma$ for a specific L-sentence $sigma$ we compute its Godel number $a = ulcorner sigma urcorner $. Then if we assume $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. membership can be queried in finite time) then we just do:
$$ a in ulcorner Sigma urcorner $$
which will return a boolean True or False value in finite time if $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable. The key here being that the characteristic function is computable.
To emphasize, computable means that the characteristic function is computable so in finite time we can know if $a in R$ or $a not in R$. So we can get both positive and negative information about the membership of $a$ wrt to $R$.
This important detail is important because of computably enumerable/generable sets. Those are the sets that ONLY positive information can be extracted.
Thanks to the comments in the question!
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3020934%2fwhat-does-it-mean-for-a-set-of-l-sentences-sigma-to-be-computable%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
An important convention that, unfortunately, often goes un-stated is that when an operation that ordinarily only applies to objects of a certain sort is applied to a set of objects of that sort, the result is the set obtained by applying that operation to the elements of that set. For example, multiplication by $2$ is an operation usually applied only to numbers. $mathbb{Z}$ is the set of all integers, so in particular is not a number but a set of numbers. The expression $2mathbb{Z}$, therefore, doesn't really make sense - we don't know what it means to multiply a set by a number. Instead, what we mean by "$2mathbb{Z}$" is ${2x mid x in mathbb{Z}}$ - in this case, the set of all even integers.
Likewise, you're right that the Godel-numbering operation typically applies only to sentences. $Sigma$ is a set of sentences; therefore, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ refers to the set ${ulcornervarphiurcornermidvarphiinSigma}$. In other words, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of sentences in $Sigma$.
Now, you say you know what it means for a Godel number to be computable. If that's the case, either you're misunderstanding something or you're mis-stating something - a single Godel number is always computable, because it's just an integer. Any integer can be computed (by a program which just outputs that number). What you almost certainly mean is that you know what it means for a set of Godel numbers to be computable - that is, there is an algorithm which, given a Godel number, will determine whether or not that number is in the set. If I'm correct in thinking that, then this notion of "computable" is specifically for things like $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ (sets of Godel numbers).
Note that the OP's text does state explicitly that $ulcornerSigmaurcorner={ulcornervarphiurcorner:varphiinSigma}$.
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 17:11
add a comment |
An important convention that, unfortunately, often goes un-stated is that when an operation that ordinarily only applies to objects of a certain sort is applied to a set of objects of that sort, the result is the set obtained by applying that operation to the elements of that set. For example, multiplication by $2$ is an operation usually applied only to numbers. $mathbb{Z}$ is the set of all integers, so in particular is not a number but a set of numbers. The expression $2mathbb{Z}$, therefore, doesn't really make sense - we don't know what it means to multiply a set by a number. Instead, what we mean by "$2mathbb{Z}$" is ${2x mid x in mathbb{Z}}$ - in this case, the set of all even integers.
Likewise, you're right that the Godel-numbering operation typically applies only to sentences. $Sigma$ is a set of sentences; therefore, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ refers to the set ${ulcornervarphiurcornermidvarphiinSigma}$. In other words, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of sentences in $Sigma$.
Now, you say you know what it means for a Godel number to be computable. If that's the case, either you're misunderstanding something or you're mis-stating something - a single Godel number is always computable, because it's just an integer. Any integer can be computed (by a program which just outputs that number). What you almost certainly mean is that you know what it means for a set of Godel numbers to be computable - that is, there is an algorithm which, given a Godel number, will determine whether or not that number is in the set. If I'm correct in thinking that, then this notion of "computable" is specifically for things like $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ (sets of Godel numbers).
Note that the OP's text does state explicitly that $ulcornerSigmaurcorner={ulcornervarphiurcorner:varphiinSigma}$.
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 17:11
add a comment |
An important convention that, unfortunately, often goes un-stated is that when an operation that ordinarily only applies to objects of a certain sort is applied to a set of objects of that sort, the result is the set obtained by applying that operation to the elements of that set. For example, multiplication by $2$ is an operation usually applied only to numbers. $mathbb{Z}$ is the set of all integers, so in particular is not a number but a set of numbers. The expression $2mathbb{Z}$, therefore, doesn't really make sense - we don't know what it means to multiply a set by a number. Instead, what we mean by "$2mathbb{Z}$" is ${2x mid x in mathbb{Z}}$ - in this case, the set of all even integers.
Likewise, you're right that the Godel-numbering operation typically applies only to sentences. $Sigma$ is a set of sentences; therefore, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ refers to the set ${ulcornervarphiurcornermidvarphiinSigma}$. In other words, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of sentences in $Sigma$.
Now, you say you know what it means for a Godel number to be computable. If that's the case, either you're misunderstanding something or you're mis-stating something - a single Godel number is always computable, because it's just an integer. Any integer can be computed (by a program which just outputs that number). What you almost certainly mean is that you know what it means for a set of Godel numbers to be computable - that is, there is an algorithm which, given a Godel number, will determine whether or not that number is in the set. If I'm correct in thinking that, then this notion of "computable" is specifically for things like $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ (sets of Godel numbers).
An important convention that, unfortunately, often goes un-stated is that when an operation that ordinarily only applies to objects of a certain sort is applied to a set of objects of that sort, the result is the set obtained by applying that operation to the elements of that set. For example, multiplication by $2$ is an operation usually applied only to numbers. $mathbb{Z}$ is the set of all integers, so in particular is not a number but a set of numbers. The expression $2mathbb{Z}$, therefore, doesn't really make sense - we don't know what it means to multiply a set by a number. Instead, what we mean by "$2mathbb{Z}$" is ${2x mid x in mathbb{Z}}$ - in this case, the set of all even integers.
Likewise, you're right that the Godel-numbering operation typically applies only to sentences. $Sigma$ is a set of sentences; therefore, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ refers to the set ${ulcornervarphiurcornermidvarphiinSigma}$. In other words, $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of sentences in $Sigma$.
Now, you say you know what it means for a Godel number to be computable. If that's the case, either you're misunderstanding something or you're mis-stating something - a single Godel number is always computable, because it's just an integer. Any integer can be computed (by a program which just outputs that number). What you almost certainly mean is that you know what it means for a set of Godel numbers to be computable - that is, there is an algorithm which, given a Godel number, will determine whether or not that number is in the set. If I'm correct in thinking that, then this notion of "computable" is specifically for things like $ulcornerSigmaurcorner$ (sets of Godel numbers).
answered Dec 1 at 16:24
Reese
15.2k11238
15.2k11238
Note that the OP's text does state explicitly that $ulcornerSigmaurcorner={ulcornervarphiurcorner:varphiinSigma}$.
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 17:11
add a comment |
Note that the OP's text does state explicitly that $ulcornerSigmaurcorner={ulcornervarphiurcorner:varphiinSigma}$.
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 17:11
Note that the OP's text does state explicitly that $ulcornerSigmaurcorner={ulcornervarphiurcorner:varphiinSigma}$.
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 17:11
Note that the OP's text does state explicitly that $ulcornerSigmaurcorner={ulcornervarphiurcorner:varphiinSigma}$.
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 17:11
add a comment |
If we have a set of Godel numbers for their L-sentences then we have:
$$ ulcorner Sigma urcorner = { ulcorner sigma urcorner : sigma in Sigma }$$
what the notes define is that $Sigma $ is computable (i.e. we can determine if a specific L-sentence is a member of that set in finite time) if its corresponding "Godel number set" $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. can we determine if a specific natural number corresponds to Godel number that corresponds to a sentence). Thats the meaning.
Basically to check membership for $Sigma$ for a specific L-sentence $sigma$ we compute its Godel number $a = ulcorner sigma urcorner $. Then if we assume $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. membership can be queried in finite time) then we just do:
$$ a in ulcorner Sigma urcorner $$
which will return a boolean True or False value in finite time if $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable. The key here being that the characteristic function is computable.
To emphasize, computable means that the characteristic function is computable so in finite time we can know if $a in R$ or $a not in R$. So we can get both positive and negative information about the membership of $a$ wrt to $R$.
This important detail is important because of computably enumerable/generable sets. Those are the sets that ONLY positive information can be extracted.
Thanks to the comments in the question!
add a comment |
If we have a set of Godel numbers for their L-sentences then we have:
$$ ulcorner Sigma urcorner = { ulcorner sigma urcorner : sigma in Sigma }$$
what the notes define is that $Sigma $ is computable (i.e. we can determine if a specific L-sentence is a member of that set in finite time) if its corresponding "Godel number set" $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. can we determine if a specific natural number corresponds to Godel number that corresponds to a sentence). Thats the meaning.
Basically to check membership for $Sigma$ for a specific L-sentence $sigma$ we compute its Godel number $a = ulcorner sigma urcorner $. Then if we assume $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. membership can be queried in finite time) then we just do:
$$ a in ulcorner Sigma urcorner $$
which will return a boolean True or False value in finite time if $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable. The key here being that the characteristic function is computable.
To emphasize, computable means that the characteristic function is computable so in finite time we can know if $a in R$ or $a not in R$. So we can get both positive and negative information about the membership of $a$ wrt to $R$.
This important detail is important because of computably enumerable/generable sets. Those are the sets that ONLY positive information can be extracted.
Thanks to the comments in the question!
add a comment |
If we have a set of Godel numbers for their L-sentences then we have:
$$ ulcorner Sigma urcorner = { ulcorner sigma urcorner : sigma in Sigma }$$
what the notes define is that $Sigma $ is computable (i.e. we can determine if a specific L-sentence is a member of that set in finite time) if its corresponding "Godel number set" $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. can we determine if a specific natural number corresponds to Godel number that corresponds to a sentence). Thats the meaning.
Basically to check membership for $Sigma$ for a specific L-sentence $sigma$ we compute its Godel number $a = ulcorner sigma urcorner $. Then if we assume $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. membership can be queried in finite time) then we just do:
$$ a in ulcorner Sigma urcorner $$
which will return a boolean True or False value in finite time if $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable. The key here being that the characteristic function is computable.
To emphasize, computable means that the characteristic function is computable so in finite time we can know if $a in R$ or $a not in R$. So we can get both positive and negative information about the membership of $a$ wrt to $R$.
This important detail is important because of computably enumerable/generable sets. Those are the sets that ONLY positive information can be extracted.
Thanks to the comments in the question!
If we have a set of Godel numbers for their L-sentences then we have:
$$ ulcorner Sigma urcorner = { ulcorner sigma urcorner : sigma in Sigma }$$
what the notes define is that $Sigma $ is computable (i.e. we can determine if a specific L-sentence is a member of that set in finite time) if its corresponding "Godel number set" $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. can we determine if a specific natural number corresponds to Godel number that corresponds to a sentence). Thats the meaning.
Basically to check membership for $Sigma$ for a specific L-sentence $sigma$ we compute its Godel number $a = ulcorner sigma urcorner $. Then if we assume $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable (i.e. membership can be queried in finite time) then we just do:
$$ a in ulcorner Sigma urcorner $$
which will return a boolean True or False value in finite time if $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is computable. The key here being that the characteristic function is computable.
To emphasize, computable means that the characteristic function is computable so in finite time we can know if $a in R$ or $a not in R$. So we can get both positive and negative information about the membership of $a$ wrt to $R$.
This important detail is important because of computably enumerable/generable sets. Those are the sets that ONLY positive information can be extracted.
Thanks to the comments in the question!
edited Dec 2 at 2:05
answered Dec 2 at 0:56
Pinocchio
1,88021754
1,88021754
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3020934%2fwhat-does-it-mean-for-a-set-of-l-sentences-sigma-to-be-computable%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
A subset of $mathbb N$ is computable if its characteristic function is recursive. (i.e. there is an effective procedure for deciding if a number is an element or not). This is a special case of a computable relation (arity 1).
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:16
1
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by 'computable symbols'... that doesn't make sense as far as I know. They've presumably defined computable functions and computable relations. They've defined the Godel number of a sentence / formula (probably based on a notion of a Godel number for a symbol), and $ulcorner Sigma urcorner$ is the set of Godel numbers of the sentences in $Sigma$, so a subset of $mathbb N,$ and thus it makes sense to ask if it's computable in the above sense.
– spaceisdarkgreen
Dec 1 at 3:33
Do you understand what a computable set of natural numbers is? (Note that $ulcorner Sigmaurcorner$ is just a set of natural numbers - namely, the set of Godel numbers of things in $Sigma$ - so that's all that's going on here.)
– Noah Schweber
Dec 1 at 4:53
@spaceisdarkgreen so are you saying to treat $ulcorner Sigma urcorner $ as a characteristic function? I think I do understand what the characteristic function being computable is (just that in finite time we know if an element if part of the relation set or not). So what he means is that $chi_{ulcorner Sigma urcorner }(sigma)$ is computable? i.e. given an L-sentence we can decide in finite time if its Godel number is in the set or not?
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:10
@spaceisdarkgreen sorry I was a bit informal with the "computable symbols", for computable symbols I meant that their Godel numbers are computable.
– Pinocchio
Dec 1 at 16:11