Re: Descriptive Set Theory

2005-10-10 Thread Bruno Marchal

Hi Tom,

Le 06-oct.-05, à 19:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :

I've been looking a little into what there is on-line about 
descriptive set theory, a relatively new field.
It seems that with the questions about cardinality and descriptions on 
this list, that descriptive set theory (Polish spaces being an 
important element) would be useful, if not essential.
A search of this list doesn't turn up any references to it.  Does 
anyone have enough knowledge of it to give a brief note on how it ties 
in with this list's discussion?



Descriptive set theory can be used in the foundations of analysis. The 
idea consists in using some nice subsets of the reals so as to avoid 
conceptual difficulties and keeping powerful tools in analysis. 
Actually I have used descriptive set theory in my first attempts to 
tackle the measure problem pertaining on the first person observer 
moments (where Kripke models fails). Some people have used it also in 
computational learning theory. I have worked hard to eliminate the use 
of descriptive set theory if only because to use them in comp you need 
some stronger from of Church thesis (but this makes them fruitful in 
some non-comp approach). Now, honestly, from I can judge about the 
knowledge of logic in this list, descriptive theory (which quantifies 
on both the natural numbers and the reals) is far too technical a 
subject so that it can be use easily.
I'm a bit busy to say much more, but perhaps you have a good intuition 
because if you describe directly the set of infinite path (histories) 
on which the 1-measure pertains, you cannot escape the "analytical 
hierarchy", the "hyperarithmetic sets", etc. But then I am happy of 
having find a way to single out the logic of comp-certainty without 
addressing the need to classify mathematically those infinite path.
To sum up, the use of descriptive set theory seems to me premature, 
although unavoidable for future work on the measure and probability 
questions on OMs.
If you are interested, a good book on the subject is the Oxford Logic 
Guides 11: "Recursive Aspects of Descriptive Set Theory" by Richard 
Mansfield and Galen Weitkamp, 1985.
Prerequisites: the whole of Rogers' book (ref in my thesis). For my 
thesis you need to understand about the half of Rogers book (the 
easiest part I would say).
But, you know, with comp, we can expect that the whole of mathematical 
logic can be of some use soon or later. Mathematical Logic is the 
"philosophical logic" of the Platonists!

(But please don't repeat this to a mathematical logician!).

Bruno

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/




Descriptive Set Theory

2005-10-06 Thread daddycaylor
I've been looking a little into what there is on-line about descriptive 
set theory, a relatively new field.
It seems that with the questions about cardinality and descriptions on 
this list, that descriptive set theory (Polish spaces being an 
important element) would be useful, if not essential.
A search of this list doesn't turn up any references to it.  Does 
anyone have enough knowledge of it to give a brief note on how it ties 
in with this list's discussion?


Tom Caylor