|
|
| Line 33: |
Line 33: |
|
| |
|
| ==Repeating the proof of Löb's theorem for modified theory== | | ==Repeating the proof of Löb's theorem for modified theory== |
| | |
| | We now repeat the proof of Löb's theorem for <math>\mathsf{PA}' := \mathsf{PA} \cup \{\Box C \to C\}</math> to see where the error is. |
|
| |
|
| # <math>\mathsf{PA}' \vdash \Box L \leftrightarrow \Box(\Box L \to C)</math> | | # <math>\mathsf{PA}' \vdash \Box L \leftrightarrow \Box(\Box L \to C)</math> |
Revision as of 03:34, 10 February 2019
original link: https://web.archive.org/web/20160319050228/http://lesswrong.com/lw/t6/the_cartoon_guide_to_l%C3%B6bs_theorem/
current LW link: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ALCnqX6Xx8bpFMZq3/the-cartoon-guide-to-loeb-s-theorem
Translating the puzzle using logic notation
Löb's theorem shows that if
, then
.
The deduction theorem says that if
, then
.
Applying the deduction theorem to Löb's theorem gives us
.
When translating to logic notation, it becomes obvious that the application of the deduction theorem is illegitimate, because we don't actually have
. This is the initial answer that Larry D'Anna gives in comments.
But now, suppose we define
, and walk through the proof of Löb's theorem for this new theory
. Then we would obtain the following implication: if
, then
. But clearly,
since
is one of the axioms of
. Therefore by modus ponens, we have
, i.e.
. Now we can apply the deduction theorem to obtain
. This means that our "Löb's theorem" for
must be incorrect, and somewhere in the ten-step proof is an error.
Translating the Löb's theorem back to logic
http://yudkowsky.net/assets/44/LobsTheorem.pdf
Since the solution to the puzzle refers back to the proof of Löb's theorem, we first translate the proof from the cartoon version back to logic:










Repeating the proof of Löb's theorem for modified theory
We now repeat the proof of Löb's theorem for
to see where the error is.









