Set Theory and Logic

   

Rule of Necessitation: True, But not Tautologous © Copyright 2017 by Colin James III All Rights Reserved.

Authors: Colin James III

1. The axiom or rule of necessitation N states that if p is a theorem, then necessarily p is a theorem: If ⊢ p then ⊢ ◻p. We show this is non-contingent (a truth), but not tautologous (a proof). We evaluate axioms (in bold) of N, K, T, 4, B, D, 5 to derive systems (in italics) of K, M, T, S4, S5, D. We conclude that N the axiom or rule of necessitation is not tautologous Because system M as derived and rendered is not tautologous, system G-M also not tautologous. What follows is that systems derived from using M are tainted, regardless of the tautological status of the result so masking the defect, such as systems S4, B, and S5. We also find that Gentzen-sequent proof is suspicious, perhaps due to its non bi-valent lattice basis in a vector space.

Comments: 3 Pages.

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2017-11-10 16:06:05

Unique-IP document downloads: 8 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus