Incorporating Perspectival Elements in a Discrete Mathematics Course

Discrete mathematics is a vast field that can be explored along many different paths. Opening with a unit on logic and proof and then taking up some additional core topics (induction, set theory, combinatorics, relations, Boolean algebra, graph theory) allows one to bring in a wealth of relevant material on history, philosophy, axiomatics, and abstraction in very natural ways. This talk looks at how my 2019 textbook on discrete mathematics, focused in this way, came to be, and it highlights the various perspectival elements the book includes

A Mathematical Model of Quantum Computer by Both Arithmetic and Set Theory

A practical viewpoint links reality, representation, and language to calculation by the concept of Turing (1936) machine being the mathematical model of our computers. After the Gödel incompleteness theorems (1931) or the insolvability of the so-called halting problem (Turing 1936; Church 1936) as to a classical machine of Turing, one of the simplest hypotheses is completeness to be suggested for two ones. That is consistent with the provability of completeness by means of two independent Peano arithmetics discussed in Section I. Many modifications of Turing machines cum quantum ones are researched in Section II for the Halting problem and completeness, and the model of two independent Turing machines seems to generalize them. Then, that pair can be postulated as the formal definition of reality therefore being complete unlike any of them standalone, remaining incomplete without its complementary counterpart. Representation is formal defined as a one-to-one mapping between the two Turing machines, and the set of all those mappings can be considered as “language” therefore including metaphors as mappings different than representation. Section III investigates that formal relation of “reality”, “representation”, and “language” modeled by (at least two) Turing machines. The independence of (two) Turing machines is interpreted by means of game theory and especially of the Nash equilibrium in Section IV. Choice and information as the quantity of choices are involved. That approach seems to be equivalent to that based on set theory and the concept of actual infinity in mathematics and allowing of practical implementations

Representation and Reality by Language: How to make a home quantum computer?

A set theory model of reality, representation and language based on the relation of completeness and incompleteness is explored. The problem of completeness of mathematics is linked to its counterpart in quantum mechanics. That model includes two Peano arithmetics or Turing machines independent of each other. The complex Hilbert space underlying quantum mechanics as the base of its mathematical formalism is interpreted as a generalization of Peano arithmetic: It is a doubled infinite set of doubled Peano arithmetics having a remarkable symmetry to the axiom of choice. The quantity of information is interpreted as the number of elementary choices (bits). Quantum information is seen as the generalization of information to infinite sets or series. The equivalence of that model to a quantum computer is demonstrated. The condition for the Turing machines to be independent of each other is reduced to the state of Nash equilibrium between them. Two relative models of language as game in the sense of game theory and as ontology of metaphors (all mappings, which are not one-to-one, i.e. not representations of reality in a formal sense) are deduced

Starting the Dismantling of Classical Mathematics

This paper uses the relevant logic, MCQ, of meaning containment to explore mathematics without various classical theses, in particular, without the law of excluded middle

Boundary Algebra: A Simple Notation for Boolean Algebra and the Truth Functors

Boundary algebra [BA] is a simpler notation for Spencer-Brown’s (1969) primary algebra [pa], the Boolean algebra 2, and the truth functors. The primary arithmetic [PA] consists of the atoms ‘()’ and the blank page, concatenation, and enclosure between ‘(‘ and ‘)’, denoting the primitive notion of distinction. Inserting letters denoting the presence or absence of () into a PA formula yields a BA formula. The BA axioms are "()()=()" (A1), and "(()) [=?] may be written or erased at will” (A2). Repeated application of these axioms to a PA formula yields a member of B= {(),?} called its simplification. (a) has two intended interpretations: (a) ? a? (Boolean algebra 2), and (a) ? ~a (sentential logic). BA is self-dual: () ? 1 [dually 0] so that B is the carrier for 2, ab ? a?b [a?b], and (a)b [(a(b))] ? a=b, so that ?=() [()=?] follows trivially and B is a poset. The BA basis abc= bca (Dilworth 1938), a(ab)= a(b), and a()=() (Bricken 2002) facilitates clausal reasoning and proof by calculation. BA also simplifies normal forms and Quine’s (1982) truth value analysis. () ? true [false] yields boundary logic.G. Spencer Brown; boundary algebra; boundary logic; primary algebra; primary arithmetic; Boolean algebra; calculation proof; C.S. Peirce; existential graphs.

Kolmogorov's Calculus of Problems and Its Legacy

Kolmogorov's Calculus of Problems is an interpretation of Heyting's intuitionistic propositional calculus published by A.N. Kolmogorov in 1932. Unlike Heyting's intended interpretation of this calculus, Kolmogorov's interpretation does not comply with the philosophical principles of Mathematical Intuitionism. This philosophical difference between Kolmogorov and Heyting implies different treatments of problems and propositions: while in Heyting's view the difference between problems and propositions is merely linguistic, Kolmogorov keeps the two concepts apart and does not apply his calculus to propositions. I stress differences between Kolmogorov's and Heyting's interpretations and show how the two interpretations diverged during their development. In this context I reconstruct Kolmogorov's philosophical views on mathematics and analyse his original take on the Hilbert-Brouwer controversy. Finally, I overview some later works motivated by Kolmogorov's Calculus of Problems and propose a justification of Kolmogorov's distinction between problems and propositions in terms of Univalent Mathematics.Comment: 66 pages including Appendi

Starting the Dismantling of Classical Mathematics

This paper uses the relevant logic, MCQ, of meaning containment to explore mathematics without various classical theses, in particular, without the law of excluded middle

A Dempster-Shafer theory inspired logic.

Issues of formalising and interpreting epistemic uncertainty have always played a prominent role in Artificial Intelligence. The Dempster-Shafer (DS) theory of partial beliefs is one of the most-well known formalisms to address the partial knowledge. Similarly to the DS theory, which is a generalisation of the classical probability theory, fuzzy logic provides an alternative reasoning apparatus as compared to Boolean logic. Both theories are featured prominently within the Artificial Intelligence domain, but the unified framework accounting for all the aspects of imprecise knowledge is yet to be developed. Fuzzy logic apparatus is often used for reasoning based on vague information, and the beliefs are often processed with the aid of Boolean logic. The situation clearly calls for the development of a logic formalism targeted specifically for the needs of the theory of beliefs. Several frameworks exist based on interpreting epistemic uncertainty through an appropriately defined modal operator. There is an epistemic problem with this kind of frameworks: while addressing uncertain information, they also allow for non-constructive proofs, and in this sense the number of true statements within these frameworks is too large. In this work, it is argued that an inferential apparatus for the theory of beliefs should follow premises of Brouwer's intuitionism. A logic refuting tertium non daturìs constructed by defining a correspondence between the support functions representing beliefs in the DS theory and semantic models based on intuitionistic Kripke models with weighted nodes. Without addional constraints on the semantic models and without modal operators, the constructed logic is equivalent to the minimal intuitionistic logic. A number of possible constraints is considered resulting in additional axioms and making the proposed logic intermediate. Further analysis of the properties of the created framework shows that the approach preserves the Dempster-Shafer belief assignments and thus expresses modality through the belief assignments of the formulae within the developed logic

Boundary Algebra: A Simpler Approach to Boolean Algebra and the Sentential Connectives

Boundary algebra [BA] is a algebra of type , and a simplified notation for Spencer-Brown’s (1969) primary algebra. The syntax of the primary arithmetic [PA] consists of two atoms, () and the blank page, concatenation, and enclosure between ‘(‘ and ‘)’, denoting the primitive notion of distinction. Inserting letters denoting, indifferently, the presence or absence of () into a PA formula yields a BA formula. The BA axioms are A1: ()()= (), and A2: “(()) [abbreviated ‘⊥’] may be written or erased at will,” implying (⊥)=(). The repeated application of A1 and A2 simplifies any PA formula to either () or ⊥. The basis for BA is B1: abc=bca (concatenation commutes & associates); B2, ⊥a=a (BA has a lower bound, ⊥); B3, (a)a=() (BA is a complemented lattice); and B4, (ba)a=(b)a (implies that BA is a distributive lattice). BA has two intended models: (1) the Boolean algebra 2 with base set B={(),⊥}, such that () ⇔ 1 [dually 0], (a) ⇔ a′, and ab ⇔ a∪b [a∩b]; and (2) sentential logic, such that () ⇔ true [false], (a) ⇔ ~a, and ab ⇔ a∨b [a∧b]. BA is a self-dual notation, facilitates a calculational style of proof, and simplifies clausal reasoning and Quine’s truth value analysis. BA resembles C.S. Peirce’s graphical logic, the symbolic logics of Leibniz and W.E. Johnson, the 2 notation of Byrne (1946), and the Boolean term schemata of Quine (1982).Boundary algebra; boundary logic; primary algebra; primary arithmetic; Boolean algebra; calculation proof; G. Spencer-Brown; C.S. Peirce; existential graphs

Kolmogorov's Calculus of Problems and Its Legacy

Kolmogorov's Calculus of Problems is an interpretation of Heyting's intuitionistic propositional calculus published by A.N. Kolmogorov in 1932. Unlike Heyting's intended interpretation of this calculus, Kolmogorov's interpretation does not comply with the philosophical principles of Mathematical Intuitionism. This philosophical difference between Kolmogorov and Heyting implies different treatments of problems and propositions: while in Heyting's view the difference between problems and propositions is merely linguistic, Kolmogorov keeps the two concepts apart and does not apply his calculus to propositions. I stress differences between Kolmogorov's and Heyting's interpretations and show how the two interpretations diverged during their development. In this context I reconstruct Kolmogorov's philosophical views on mathematics and analyse his original take on the Hilbert-Brouwer controversy. Finally, I overview some later works motivated by Kolmogorov's Calculus of Problems and propose a justification of Kolmogorov's distinction between problems and propositions in terms of Univalent Mathematics