A constructive formulation of Gleason's theorem

Journal of Philosophical Logic 26 (6):661-670 (1997)
Abstract
In this paper I wish to show that we can give a statement of a restricted form of Gleason's Theorem that is classically equivalent to the standard formulation, but that avoids the counterexample that Hellman gives in "Gleason's Theorem is not Constructively Provable"
Keywords Philosophy
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1023/A:1004275113665
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 23,316
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
A. S. Troelstra (1988). Constructivism in Mathematics: An Introduction. Sole Distributors for the U.S.A. And Canada, Elsevier Science Pub. Co..

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Fred Richman (2000). Gleason's Theorem has a Constructive Proof. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (4):425-431.
Ehud Hrushovski & Itamar Pitowsky (2004). Generalizations of Kochen and Specker's Theorem and the Effectiveness of Gleason's Theorem. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35 (2):177-194.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

23 ( #204,634 of 1,932,586 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #456,398 of 1,932,586 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.