Concerning Sheffer stroke equational proofs, it's worth noting that there's 
a duality at play.  Wolfram's axiom holds even if the stroke is interpreted 
as NOR instead of NAND.  |- (p(pp)) <-> (q(qq)) with either interpretation, 
so the truth-value of (p(pp)) is constant, independent of the value of p.  
However, it takes an axiom like |- (p(pp)) to nail down that constant as 
TRUE and the interpretation as NAND.

"this interpretation his system would be composed of two rules of 
inferences and no axioms"
I played with this approach using a 2basis  
(https://www.cs.unm.edu/~veroff/DOCS/2basis.pdf) which is a precursor to 
Wolfram's axiom.  However, I added the axiom |-(p(pp)) so that tautologies 
without biconditionals could be expressed.  The plus is that makes mappings 
to set.mm seem a bit more tractable.  The minus is that it takes gobs to 
get to something like https://us.metamath.org/mpegif/dfbi1ALT.html or  
 https://us.metamath.org/mpegif/nic-bi1.html that express equality in this 
system.  It got way messy, so I bailed on the idea.

And yeah, it's very weird.  Because the inference rules are mirrors of each 
other, all proofs are reversable.  Because the inference rules don't have & 
(like modus ponens), proofs don't have a tree-like structure.  It's more 
like a linear sequence.  If you have a proof of |-a, you can make an 
interface T=>a and a=>T.   By "* instantiation"  you also have  a(bb) 
=>T(bb).  Because T can be written with any variable, the lemma (b(bb))(bb) 
=> b can be tacked on.  So in the end, given |-a,  a(bb)=>b  Very messy for 
one application of modus ponens.  


On Friday, June 14, 2024 at 9:41:43 PM UTC-5 [email protected] wrote:

> I don't know if this will help, but I found proofs of mpi and a1d from 
> welsh's second axiom:
> MM> show proof w2mpi
> 16     min=w2luk2  $p |- ( ( -. ps -> ps ) -> ps )
> 19     maj=w2ax1   $p |- ( ( ( -. ps -> ps ) -> ps ) -> ( -. ch -> ( ( -. 
> ps ->
>                                                                ps ) -> ps 
> ) ) )
> 20   min=ax-mp   $a |- ( -. ch -> ( ( -. ps -> ps ) -> ps ) )
> 29     min=w2mpi.2 $e |- ( ps -> ( ph -> ch ) )
> 34       min=w2mpi.1 $e |- ph
> 40       maj=ax-w2   $a |- ( ph -> ( ( ps -> ( ph -> ch ) ) -> ( ( -. ch 
> -> ( (
>                                   -. ps -> ps ) -> ps ) ) -> ( ps -> ch ) 
> ) ) )
> 41     maj=ax-mp   $a |- ( ( ps -> ( ph -> ch ) ) -> ( ( -. ch -> ( ( -. 
> ps ->
>                                              ps ) -> ps ) ) -> ( ps -> ch 
> ) ) )
> 42   maj=ax-mp   $a |- ( ( -. ch -> ( ( -. ps -> ps ) -> ps ) ) -> ( ps -> 
> ch )
>                                                                           
>     )
> 43 w2mpi=ax-mp $a |- ( ps -> ch )
>
> MM> show proof w2a1d
> 17     min=w2luk2    $p |- ( ( -. ch -> ch ) -> ch )
> 20     maj=w2ax1     $p |- ( ( ( -. ch -> ch ) -> ch ) -> ( -. ps -> ( ( 
> -. ch
>                                                             -> ch ) -> ch 
> ) ) )
> 21   w2mpi.1=ax-mp $a |- ( -. ps -> ( ( -. ch -> ch ) -> ch ) )
> 33       min=w2a1d.1   $e |- ( ph -> ps )
> 36       maj=w2ax1     $p |- ( ( ph -> ps ) -> ( ch -> ( ph -> ps ) ) )
> 37     w2mpi.1=ax-mp $a |- ( ch -> ( ph -> ps ) )
> 43     w2mpi.2=ax-w2 $a |- ( ph -> ( ( ch -> ( ph -> ps ) ) -> ( ( -. ps 
> -> ( (
>                                   -. ch -> ch ) -> ch ) ) -> ( ch -> ps ) 
> ) ) )
> 44   w2mpi.2=w2mpi $p |- ( ph -> ( ( -. ps -> ( ( -. ch -> ch ) -> ch ) ) 
> -> (
>                                                                  ch -> ps 
> ) ) )
> 45 w2a1d=w2mpi   $p |- ( ph -> ( ch -> ps ) )
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Metamath" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/50647516-8a36-4b5b-9583-cdfe65ba566en%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to