The Problem of Mathematical Objects

2020 ◽  
pp. 213-224
Author(s):  
Bob Hale

If fundamental mathematical theories such as arithmetic and analysis are taken at face value, any attempt to provide an epistemological foundation—roughly, an account which explains how we can know standard mathematical theories to be true, or at least justifiably believe them—must confront the problem of mathematical objects—the problem of explaining how a belief in the existence of an infinity of natural numbers, an uncountable infinity of real numbers, etc., is to be justified. One small but fundamental part of the problem is discussed: whether we can be justified in believing that there is a denumerable infinity of natural numbers, or, more generally, an infinity of objects of any kind. The chapter considers two broad approaches to this problem—what are called object-based and property-based approaches.

Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Ramírez

We provide an axiomatic base for the set of natural numbers, that has been proposed as a canonical construction, and use this definition of $\mathbb N$ to find several results on finite group theory. Every finite group $G$, is well represented with a natural number $N_G$; if $N_G=N_H$ then $H,G$ are in the same isomorphism class. We have a linear order on all finite groups, that is well behaved with respect to cardinality. In fact, if $H,G$ are two finite groups such that $|H|=m<n=|G|$, then $H<\mathbb Z_n\leq G$. Internally, there is also a canonical order for the elements of any finite group $G$, and we find equivalent objects. This allows us to find the automorphisms of $G$. The Cayley table of $G$ takes canonical block form, and a minimal set of independent equations that define the group is obtained. Examples are given, using all groups with less than ten elements, to illustrate the procedure for finding all groups of $n$ elements, and we order them externally and internally. The canonical block form of the symmetry group $\Delta_4$ is given and we find its automorphisms. These results are extended to the infinite case. A real number is an infinite set of natural numbers. A real function is a set of real numbers, and a sequence of real functions $f_1,f_2,\ldots$ is well represented by a set of real numbers, also. We make brief mention on the calculus of real numbers. In general, we are able to represent mathematical objects using the smallest possible data-type. In the last section, mathematical objects of all types are well assigned to tree structures. We conclude with comments on type theory and future work on computational and physical aspects of these representations.


Author(s):  
Juan Ramirez

We provide an axiomatic base for the set of natural numbers, that has been proposed as a canonical construction, and use this definition of $\mathbb N$ to find several results on finite group theory. Every finite group $G$, is well represented with a natural number $N_G$; if $N_G=N_H$ then $H,G$ are in the same isomorphism class. We have a linear order on all finite groups, that is well behaved with respect to cardinality. In fact, if $H,G$ are two finite groups such that $|H|=m<n=|G|$, then $H<\mathbb Z_n\leq G$. There is also a canonical order for the elements of $G$ and we can define equivalent objects of $G$. This allows us to find the automorphisms of $G$. The Cayley table of $G$ takes canonical block form, and a minimal set of independent equations that define the group is obtained. We show how to find all groups of order $n$, and order them. Examples are given using all groups with order smaller than $10$. The canonical block form of the symmetry group $\Delta_4$ is given and we find its automorphisms. These results are extended to the infinite case. A real number is an infinite set of natural numbers. A real function is a set of real numbers, and a sequence of real functions $f_1,f_2,\ldots$ is well represented by a set of real numbers, as well. We make brief comments on treating the calculus of real numbers. In general, we represent mathematical objects using the smallest possible data-type. In the last section, mathematical objects are well assigned to tree structures. We conclude with brief comments on type theory and future work on computational and physical aspects of these representations.


Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Ramirez

We provide a construction of natural numbers that is unique with respect to other constructions, and use this construction in the domain of algebra and finite functions to find several results in finite group theory. First, we give a linear order to the set of all finite functions. This gives a linear order in the subset of all finite permutations. To do this, we assign a unique natural number, $N_f$, to every finite function $f$. The sub order on permutations is well defined with respect to cardinality; if $\eta_m,\eta_n$ are permutations on $m<n$ objects, then $N_{\eta_m}<N_{\eta_n}$. This representation also has the characteristic $N_{\textbf{1}_n}<N_{\eta}<N_{\textbf{id}_n}$ where $\textbf{1}_n$ is the one-cycle permutation of $n$ objects, $\textbf{id}_n$ is the identity permutation of $n$ objects, and $\eta$ is any permutation of $n$ objects. This representation provides a good definition of equivalent functions, and equivalent objects on functions. We are able to do this for both concrete functions, and abstract functions. We use this in the main section, on group theory, to number the set of all finite groups. We are able to well represent every finite group as a natural number; two groups are represented by the same natural number if and only if they are in the same isomorphism class. In fact, we are able to give a linear order to the set of finite groups. Specifically, we give a canonical bijective function $\textbf{G}_{Fin}\rightarrow\mathbb N$. This representation, $N_G$, of $G$, is also well behaved with respect to cardinality. Additionally, the cyclic group $\mathbb Z_n$ has smaller representation than any group of $n$ objects, and the group with largest representation is the abelian group $\mathbb Z_{p_1}^{n_1}\oplus\mathbb Z_{p_2}^{n_2}\oplus\cdots\oplus\mathbb Z_{p_k}^{n_k}$, where $n=p_1^{n_1}p_2^{n_2}\cdots p_{k}^{n_k}$ is the prime factorization of $n$. This representation of a finite group as a natural number also provides a linear order to the elements of the group, arranging its Cayley table in a canonical block form. The last section is an introductory description of real numbers as infinite sets of natural numbers. Real functions are represented as sets of real numbers, and sequences of real functions $f_1,f_2,\ldots$ are well represented by sets of real numbers, as well. In the last section we well assign mathematical objects to tree structures and conclude with some brief comments on type theory and future work. In general we are able to represent and manipulate mathematical objects with the smallest possible type, and minimum complexity.


Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Ramirez

We provide an axiomatic base for the set of natural numbers, that has been proposed as a canonical construction, and use this definition of $\mathbb N$ to find several results on finite group theory. Every finite group $G$, is well represented with a natural number $N_G$; if $N_G=N_H$ then $H,G$ are in the same isomorphism class. We have a linear order, on the quotient space of isomorphism classes of finite groups, that is well behaved with respect to cardinality. If $H,G$ are two finite groups such that $|H|=m<n=|G|$, then $H<\mathbb Z_n\leq G\leq\mathbb Z_{p_1}^{n_1}\oplus\mathbb Z_{p_2}^{n_2}\oplus\cdots\oplus\mathbb Z_{p_k}^{n_k}$ where $n=p_1^{n_1}p_2^{n_2}\cdots p_{k}^{n_k}$ is the prime factorization of $n$. We find a canonical order for the objects of $G$ and define equivalent objects of $G$, thus finding the automorphisms of $G$. The Cayley table of $G$ takes canonical block form, and we are provided with a minimal set of independent equations that define the group. We show how to find all groups of order $n$, and order them. We give examples using all groups with order smaller than $10$, and we find the canonical block form of the symmetry group $\Delta_4$. In the next section, we extend our results to the infinite case, which defines a real number as an infinite set of natural numbers. A real function is a set of real numbers, and a sequence of real functions $f_1,f_2,\ldots$ is well represented by a set of real numbers, as well. In general, we represent mathematical objects using the smallest possible data-type. In the last section, mathematical objects are well assigned to tree structures. We conclude with brief comments on type theory and future work on computational aspects of these representations.


1982 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 359-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Lifschitz

We distinguish between two kinds of mathematical assertions: objective and constructive. An objective assertion describes the universe of mathematical objects; a constructive one describes the (idealized) mathematician's ability to find mathematical objects with various properties. The familiar formalizations of classical mathematics are based on formal languages designed for expressing objective assertions only. The constructivist program stresses, on the contrary, the importance of constructive assertions; moreover, intuitionism claims that constructive activities of the mind constitute the very subject matter of mathematics, and thus questions the semantic status of objective assertions.The purpose of this paper is to show that classical mathematics can be extended to include constructive sentences, so that both objective and constructive properties can be discussed in the framework of the same theory. To achieve this goal, we introduce a new property of mathematical objects, calculability.The word “calculable” may be applied to objects of various types: natural numbers, integers, rational or real numbers, polynomials with rational or real coefficients, etc. In each case it has a different meaning, so that actually we define not one, but many new properties.


Author(s):  
Juan Ramirez

We provide an axiomatic base for the set of natural numbers, that has been proposed as a canonical construction, and use this definition of $\mathbb N$ to find several results on finite group theory. Every finite group $G$, is well represented with a natural number $N_G$; if $N_G=N_H$ then $H,G$ are in the same isomorphism class. We have a linear order on all finite groups, that is well behaved with respect to cardinality. In fact, if $H,G$ are two finite groups such that $|H|=m<n=|G|$, then $H<\mathbb Z_n\leq G$. There is also a canonical order for the elements of $G$ and we can define equivalent objects of $G$. This allows us to find the automorphisms of $G$. The Cayley table of $G$ takes canonical block form, and a minimal set of independent equations that define the group is obtained. We show how to find all groups of order $n$, and order them. Examples are given using all groups with order smaller than $10$. The canonical block form of the symmetry group $\Delta_4$ is given and we find its automorphisms. These results are extended to the infinite case. A real number is an infinite set of natural numbers. A real function is a set of real numbers, and a sequence of real functions $f_1,f_2,\ldots$ is well represented by a set of real numbers, as well. We make brief comments on treating the calculus of real numbers. In general, we represent mathematical objects using the smallest possible data-type. In the last section, mathematical objects are well assigned to tree structures. We conclude with brief comments on type theory and future work on computational and physical aspects of these representations.


Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Ramirez

We provide a construction of natural numbers that is unique with respect to other constructions, and use this construction in the domain of algebra and finite functions to find several results in finite group theory. First, we give a linear order to the set of all finite functions. This gives a linear order in the subset of all finite permutations. To do this, we assign a unique natural number, $N_f$, to every finite function $f$. The sub order on permutations is well defined with respect to cardinality; if $\eta_m,\eta_n$ are permutations on $m<n$ objects, then $N_{\eta_m}<N_{\eta_n}$. This representation also has the characteristic $N_{\textbf{1}_n}<N_{\eta}<N_{\textbf{id}_n}$ where $\textbf{1}_n$ is the one-cycle permutation of $n$ objects, $\textbf{id}_n$ is the identity permutation of $n$ objects, and $\eta$ is any permutation of $n$ objects. This representation provides a good definition of equivalent functions, and equivalent objects on functions. We are able to do this for both concrete functions, and abstract functions. We use this in the main section, on group theory, to number the set of all finite groups. We are able to well represent every finite group as a natural number; two groups are represented by the same natural number if and only if they are in the same isomorphism class. In fact, we are able to give a linear order to the set of finite groups. Specifically, we give a canonical bijective function $\textbf{G}_{Fin}\rightarrow\mathbb N$. This representation, $N_G$, of $G$, is also well behaved with respect to cardinality. Additionally, the cyclic group $\mathbb Z_n$ has smaller representation than any group of $n$ objects, and the group with largest representation is the abelian group $\mathbb Z_{p_1}^{n_1}\oplus\mathbb Z_{p_2}^{n_2}\oplus\cdots\oplus\mathbb Z_{p_k}^{n_k}$, where $n=p_1^{n_1}p_2^{n_2}\cdots p_{k}^{n_k}$ is the prime factorization of $n$. This representation of a finite group as a natural number also provides a linear order to the elements of the group, arranging its Cayley table in a canonical block form. The last section is an introductory description of real numbers as infinite sets of natural numbers. Real functions are represented as sets of real numbers, and sequences of real functions $f_1,f_2,\ldots$ are well represented by sets of real numbers, as well. In the last section we well assign mathematical objects to tree structures and conclude with some brief comments on type theory and future work. In general we are able to represent and manipulate mathematical objects with the smallest possible type, and minimum complexity.


Author(s):  
Susan D'Agostino

“Proceed with care, because some infinities are larger than others” explains in detail why the infinite set of real numbers—all of the numbers on the number line—represents a far larger infinity than the infinite set of natural numbers—the counting numbers. Readers learn to distinguish between countable infinity and uncountable infinity by way of a method known as a “one-to-one correspondence.” Mathematics students and enthusiasts are encouraged to proceed with care in both mathematics and life, lest they confuse countable infinity with uncountable infinity, large with unfathomably large, or order with disorder. At the chapter’s end, readers may check their understanding by working on a problem. A solution is provided.


Author(s):  
Harold Hodes

A reducibility is a relation of comparative computational complexity (which can be made precise in various non-equivalent ways) between mathematical objects of appropriate sorts. Much of recursion theory concerns such relations, initially between sets of natural numbers (in so-called classical recursion theory), but later between sets of other sorts (in so-called generalized recursion theory). This article considers only the classical setting. Also Turing first defined such a relation, now called Turing- (or just T-) reducibility; probably most logicians regard it as the most important such relation. Turing- (or T-) degrees are the units of computational complexity when comparative complexity is taken to be T-reducibility.


1998 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilfrid Hodges

§1. Introduction. I dedicate this essay to the two-dozen-odd people whose refutations of Cantor's diagonal argument (I mean the one proving that the set of real numbers and the set of natural numbers have different cardinalities) have come to me either as referee or as editor in the last twenty years or so. Sadly these submissions were all quite unpublishable; I sent them back with what I hope were helpful comments. A few years ago it occurred to me to wonder why so many people devote so much energy to refuting this harmless little argument—what had it done to make them angry with it? So I started to keep notes of these papers, in the hope that some pattern would emerge.These pages report the results. They might be useful for editors faced with similar problem papers, or even for the authors of the papers themselves. But the main message to reach me is that there are several points of basic elementary logic that we usually teach and explain very badly, or not at all.In 1995 an engineer named William Dilworth, who had published a refutation of Cantor's argument in the Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters, sued for libel a mathematician named Underwood Dudley who had called him a crank ([9] pp. 44f, 354).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document