PreprintArticleVersion 6Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

The Predicate of the Current Mathematical Knowledge Substantially Increases the Constructive and Informal Mathematics and Why It Cannot Be Adapted to Any Empirical Science

Version 1
: Received: 27 July 2023 / Approved: 28 July 2023 / Online: 31 July 2023 (10:54:27 CEST)
Version 2
: Received: 2 August 2023 / Approved: 3 August 2023 / Online: 4 August 2023 (07:45:49 CEST)
Version 3
: Received: 14 August 2023 / Approved: 15 August 2023 / Online: 15 August 2023 (08:49:43 CEST)
Version 4
: Received: 29 August 2023 / Approved: 30 August 2023 / Online: 31 August 2023 (03:53:31 CEST)
Version 5
: Received: 5 September 2023 / Approved: 6 September 2023 / Online: 7 September 2023 (05:01:30 CEST)
Version 6
: Received: 20 September 2023 / Approved: 21 September 2023 / Online: 22 September 2023 (05:14:58 CEST)
Version 7
: Received: 9 October 2023 / Approved: 10 October 2023 / Online: 10 October 2023 (10:05:52 CEST)
Version 8
: Received: 17 October 2023 / Approved: 18 October 2023 / Online: 19 October 2023 (04:49:53 CEST)
Version 9
: Received: 4 December 2023 / Approved: 6 December 2023 / Online: 6 December 2023 (12:11:37 CET)

How to cite:
Tyszka, A. The Predicate of the Current Mathematical Knowledge Substantially Increases the Constructive and Informal Mathematics and Why It Cannot Be Adapted to Any Empirical Science. Preprints2023, 2023072063. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202307.2063.v6
Tyszka, A. The Predicate of the Current Mathematical Knowledge Substantially Increases the Constructive and Informal Mathematics and Why It Cannot Be Adapted to Any Empirical Science. Preprints 2023, 2023072063. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202307.2063.v6

Tyszka, A. The Predicate of the Current Mathematical Knowledge Substantially Increases the Constructive and Informal Mathematics and Why It Cannot Be Adapted to Any Empirical Science. Preprints2023, 2023072063. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202307.2063.v6

APA Style

Tyszka, A. (2023). The Predicate of the Current Mathematical Knowledge Substantially Increases the Constructive and Informal Mathematics and Why It Cannot Be Adapted to Any Empirical Science. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202307.2063.v6

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tyszka, A. 2023 "The Predicate of the Current Mathematical Knowledge Substantially Increases the Constructive and Informal Mathematics and Why It Cannot Be Adapted to Any Empirical Science" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202307.2063.v6

Abstract

We assume that the current mathematical knowledge K is a finite set of statements in the public domain which is time-dependent. This set exists only theoretically. Ignoring K and its subsets, sets exist formally in ZFC theory although their properties can be time-dependent (when they depend on K) or informal. In every branch of mathematics, the set of all knowable truths is the set of all theorems. This set exists independently of K. Algorithms always terminate. We explain the distinction between algorithms whose existence is provable in ZFC and constructively defined algorithms which are currently known. By using this distinction, we obtain non-trivial statements on decidable sets X⊆N that belong to constructive and informal mathematics and refer to the current mathematical knowledge on X. This and the next sentence justify the article title. For any empirical science, we can identify the current knowledge with that science because truths from the empirical sciences are not necessary truths but working models of truth from a particular context. For a set X⊆N whose infiniteness is false or unproven, we define which elements of X are classified as known. No known set X⊆N satisfies Conditions (1)-(4) and is widely known in number theory or naturally defined, where this term has only informal meaning. (1) A known algorithm with no input returns an integer n satisfying card(X)<ω ⇒ X⊆(-∞,n]. (2) A known algorithm for every k∈N decides whether or not k∈X. (3) No known algorithm with no input returns the logical value of the statement card(X)=ω. (4) There are many elements of X and it is conjectured, though so far unproven, that X is infinite. (5) X is naturally defined. The infiniteness of X is false or unproven. X has the simplest definition among known sets Y⊆N with the same set of known elements. We prove that the set X={n∈N: the interval [-1,n] contains more than 29.5+(11!/(3n+1))∙sin(n) primes of the form k!+1} satisfies Conditions (1)-(5) except the requirement that X is naturally defined. 501893∈X. Condition (1) holds with n=501893. card(X∩[0,501893])=159827. X∩[501894,∞)={n∈N: the interval [-1,n] contains at least 30 primes of the form k!+1}. If we add to X some set W satisfying 14≤card(W)≤23, then the following statements hold: X does not satisfy Condition (1), 159827+14≤card(X), the above lower bound is currently the best known, card(X)<ω ⇒ card(X)≤159827+23, the above upper bound is currently the best known, X satisfies Conditions (2)-(5) except the requirement that X is naturally defined. We present a table that shows satisfiable conjunctions of the form #(Condition 1)∧(Condition 2)∧#(Condition 3)∧(Condition 4)∧#(Condition 5), where # denotes the negation ¬ or the absence of any symbol. No set X⊆N will satisfy Conditions (1)-(4) forever, if for every algorithm with no input, at some future day, a computer will be able to execute this algorithm in 1 second or less.

Keywords

conjecturally infinite subsets of N; constructive algorithms; current mathematical knowledge; informal notions; known algorithms; known elements of N

Subject

Computer Science and Mathematics, Logic

Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Commenter: Apoloniusz Tyszka

Commenter's Conflict of Interests: Author