dc.contributor.author | Blanck, Rasmus | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2011-05-10T08:36:57Z | |
dc.date.available | 2011-05-10T08:36:57Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2011-05-10 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2077/25475 | |
dc.description.abstract | It is a well known fact that the G ̈del sentences γ of a theory T are
o
all provably equivalent to the consistency statement of T , Con T . This
result is independent from choice of proof predicate. It has been proved
by Guaspari and Solovay [4] that this is not the case for Rosser sentences
of T . There are proof predicates whose Rosser sentences are all provably
equivalent and also proof predicates whose Rosser sentences are not all
provably equivalent. This paper is an attempt to investigate the matter
and explicitly define proof predicates of both kinds. | sv |
dc.language.iso | eng | sv |
dc.title | On Rosser sentences and proof predicates | sv |
dc.type | Text | |
dc.setspec.uppsok | HumanitiesTheology | |
dc.type.uppsok | H1 | |
dc.contributor.department | Göteborgs universitet/Institutionen för filosofi, lingvistik och vetenskapsteori | swe |
dc.contributor.department | Göteborg University/Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science | eng |
dc.type.degree | Student essay | |