$x, y \in \mathbb{R}$ Is the proposition $x \leq y \Rightarrow x=y \lor x<y$ true in intuitionistic logic ? And what about $x \leq y \Rightarrow \lnot(\lnot(x=y \lor x<y))$ (with $\lnot$ the negation) Thanks for your help !

Oftentimes in math we see statements of the form $P \to (Q \vee R)$. To prove them we can assume $P$ is true and $R$ is false, and then demonstrate that $Q$ is true. This method of proof has the form: $$ [ (P \wedge \neg R) \to Q ] \to [ P \to ( […]

Similar to Is $ \forall x(P(x) \lor Q(x)) \vdash \forall x P(x) \lor \exists xQ(x) $ provable?, but with intuitionistic logic. I expect it is not, since I don’t think the $\exists x Q(x)$ on the right is very “constructive”, but curiously the finite version of this $$((p_1\lor q_1)\land(p_2\lor q_2))\to((p_1\land p_2)\lor(q_1\lor q_2))$$ is intutitionistically provable, […]

I am trying to understand a proof I read in Herrlich’s book Axiom of Choice. For those who know the book, it is theorem 4.54 on page 74. The part I am interested in reads: (9) A function $f:X \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, defined on some subspace $X$ of $\mathbb{R}$, is continuous iff it is sequentially continuous. […]

In constructive mathematics we often hear expressions such as “extracting computational content from proofs”, “the constructivity of mathematics lies in its computational content”, “realizability models allow to study the computational content”, “intuitionistic double-negation forgets the computational content of a proposition”, and so on. I was wondering if there is a formal notion of computational content […]

Why does a logic system not use the law of the excluded middle? I studied non-classical logic (intuitionistic and modal) where double negation can’t be removed and the law of excluded middle can’t be used. But what is a simple example that non-mathematicians can directly understand where we can’t use the law of the excluded […]

I have a feeling it’s not, because ¬¬P → P is not provable. If it is, I’m not sure what kind of reductio I’d need to negate ¬(¬¬P → P). I believe a textbook somewhere said it was provable in intuitionistic logic, so am I missing something or is the textbook wrong?

First off, I’m not sure if “intangible” is standard terminology, Wikipedia defines an intangible object to be: “objects that are proved to exist, but which cannot be explicitly constructed”. So if someone could point me towards better terminology, I’d appreciate it. The linked article from Wikipedia claims that the axiom of choice implies the existence […]

For every orthogonal matrix $Q$ over the reals there is an orthogonal matrix $P$ and a block diagonal matrix $D$ such that $D=PQP^{t}$. Each block in D is either $(1)$, $(-1)$ or a two dimensional block of the form $\left( \begin{array}{cc} \cos(\alpha) & -\sin(\alpha) \\ \sin(\alpha) & \cos(\alpha) \\ \end{array} \right) $. Is there a […]

I’ve heard that some axioms, such as “all functions are continuous” or “all functions are computable”, are compatible with intuitionistic type theories but not their classical equivalents. But if they aren’t compatible with LEM, shouldn’t that mean they prove not LEM? But not LEM means not (A or not A) which in particular implies not […]

Intereting Posts

An improper-integral $\int_0^\infty\left(1-e^{-\frac{a}{x}}\right)\mathrm{d}x$
Absolute continuous family of measures
(Induction) $n$-digit binary numbers that have no consecutive $1$'s is the Fibonacci number $F_{n+2}$.
$x_n$ is the $n$'th positive solution to $x=\tan(x)$. Find $\lim_{n\to\infty}\left(x_n-x_{n-1}\right)$
Integration using residues
Jordan normal form for a characteristic polynomial $(x-a)^5$
How can I explain $0.999\ldots=1$?
If $f,g$ are continuous at $a$, show that $h(x)=\max\{f(x),g(x)\}$ and $k(x)=\min\{f(x),g(x)\}$ are also continuous at $a$
What makes a context free grammar ambiguous?
Riemannian manifolds isometry
Let $\text{Rank}{(A – \lambda I)^k} = \text{Rank}{(B – \lambda I)^k}$. Why are $A$ and $B$ similar?
Sufficient and necessary condition for strictly monotone differentiable functions
Predicate logic for statements about functions?
Number of all labeled, unordered rooted trees with $n$ vertices and $k$ leaves.
Need to clarify that this series diverges