SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2407.02507

On foundations for deductive mathematics

Abstract

This article was motivated by the discovery of a potential new foundation for mainstream mathematics. The goals are to clarify the relationships between primitives, foundations, and deductive practice; to understand how to determine what is, or isn't, a foundation; and get clues as to how a foundation can be optimized for effective human use. For this we turn to history and professional practice of the subject. We have no asperations to Philosophy. The first section gives a short abstract discussion, focusing on the significance of consistency. The next briefly describes foundations, explicit and implicit, at a few key periods in mathematical history. We see, for example, that at the primitive level human intuitions are essential, but can be problematic. We also see that traditional axiomatic set theories, Zermillo-Fraenkel-Choice (ZFC) in particular, are not quite consistent with mainstream practice. The final section sketches the proposed new foundation and gives the basic argument that it is uniquely qualified to be considered {the} foundation of mainstream deductive mathematics. The ``coherent limit axiom'' characterizes the new theory among ZFC-like theories. This axiom plays a role in recursion, but is implicitly assumed in mainstream work so does not provide new leverage there. In principle it should settle set-theory questions such as the continuum hypothesis.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Frank Quinn. 2025-02-16. On foundations for deductive mathematics. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02507

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Perspectives on the unit distance problem

This is a survey on an old open problem in combinatorics called the unit distance problem, and the field of mathematics around it, called incidence geometry. What do we know about the problem? Why is it difficult? How does it connect with other parts of math?

math.HO

A Categorical Approach to Euclidean Ratios and Proportions

A categorial approach to the non-metric geometry in Books V and VI of Euclid's \textit{Elements} is presented. Specifically, we introduce a diagrammatic syntax that can be overlaid immediately on his diagrams, thus bridging intuitive presentation with fidelity to Euclid's arguments. This syntax makes complicated definitions like V.5, and indeed the arguments throughout books V and VI, including arguments about similar figures, intuitively clear. We show in an appendix that this syntax can be used to solve a puzzle regarding ancient mathematics. Finally, we offer evidence that this approach to Euclidean diagrams is rooted in the Aristotelian tradition itself, and that a similar syntax was utilized, in antiquity, for related questions of numeric and proportions. Thus the syntax is plausibly faithful to Euclid's own thought-world, and not an outside-imposition.

math.HO

Some Early Results by Tutte Regarding the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture in 1948

OpenAI recently announced a proof of the Cycle Double Cover (CDC) Conjecture. Most media reports have characterized it as a 50-year-old open problem. In reality, according to a 1987 letter from Tutte to Fleischner, the Cycle Double Cover Problem has been open for at least 80 years. Two early results regarding the CDC conjecture were established in one of Tutte's 1949 publications.

math.HO