A constructive formulation of Gleason's theorem

Journal of Philosophical Logic 26 (6):661-670 (1997)
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
 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: 15,822
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.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

22 ( #130,234 of 1,724,742 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

3 ( #210,951 of 1,724,742 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

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