Recursively Enumerable Sets of Positive Integers and Their Decision Problems

Abstract

Introduction. Recent developments of symbolic logic have considerable importance for mathematics both with respect to its philosophy and practice. That mathematicians generally are oblivious to the importance of this work of Gödel, Church, Turing, Kleene, Rosser and others as it affects the subject of their own interest is in part due to the forbidding, diverse and alien formalisms in which this work is embodied. Yet, without such formalism, this pioneering work would lose most of its cogency. But apart from the question of importance, these formalisms bring to mathematics a new and precise mathematical concept, that of the general recursive function of Hërbrand-Gödel-Kleene, or its proved equivalents in the developments of Church and Turing. 1 It is the purpose of this lecture to demonstrate by example that this concept admits of development into a mathematical theory much as the group concept has been developed into a theory of groups. Moreover, that stripped of its formalism, such a theory admits of an intuitive development which can be followed, if not indeed pursued, by a mathematician, layman though he be in this formal field. It is this intuitive development of a very limited portion of a sub-theory of the hoped for general theory that we present in this lecture. We must emphasize that, with a few exceptions explicitly so noted, we have obtained formal proofs of all the consequently mathematical theorems here developed informally. Yet the real mathematics involved must lie in the informal development. For in every instance the informal "proof" was first obtained; and once gotten, transforming it into the formal proof turned out to be a routine chore. 2 We shall not here reproduce the formal definition of recursive function of positive integers. A simple example of such a function is an

On the Hardness of Almost–Sure Termination

“…Definition 2 (Many-One Reducibility and Completeness [13,14,15]). Let A, B be arithmetical sets and let X be some appropriate universe such that A, B ⊆ X.…”

What artificial grammar learning reveals about the neurobiology of syntax

“…Turing (1936aTuring ( , 1936b explicitly models his machine on human calculation capacities in what must be some of the most important work in theoretical cognitive science (Wells, 2005). It clearly rivals the work of Chomsky (1957Chomsky ( , 1965, who borrowed some of the crucial concepts and ideas from this branch of mathematics, including the work of Post (1944) and Kleene (1952). Turing explicitly designs the computational part of his machine as a finite-state control architecture for reasons of finite-precision computation (1936a; 1936b).…”

Complex Type 4 Structure Changing Dynamics of Digital Agents: Nash Equilibria of a Game with Arms Race in Innovations

“…It is postulated that in phenomena ranging from the genome to human proteanism, the Gödel sentence is a ubiquitous syntactic construction without which escape from hostile agents qua the Liar is impossible and digital agents become entrained within fixed repertoires. The only recursive best response function of a 2-person adversarial game that can implement strategic innovation in lock-step formation of an arms race is the productive function of the Emil Post [58] set theoretic proof of the Gödel incompleteness result. This overturns the view of game theorists that surprise and innovation cannot be a Nash equilibrium of a game.…”