# A Proof of Completeness for Continuous First-Order Logic

Abstract
Continuous first-order logic has found interest among model theorists who wish to extend the classical analysis of “algebraic” structures (such as fields, group, and graphs) to various natural classes of complete metric structures (such as probability algebras, Hilbert spaces, and Banach spaces). With research in continuous first-order logic preoccupied with studying the model theory of this framework, we find a natural question calls for attention. Is there an interesting set of axioms yielding a completeness result? The primary purpose of this article is to show that a certain, interesting set of axioms does indeed yield a completeness result for continuous first-order logic. In particular, we show that in continuous first-order logic a set of formulae is (completely) satisfiable if (and only if) it is consistent. From this result it follows that continuous first-order logic also satisfies an approximated form of strong completeness, whereby Σ⊨φ (if and) only if Σ⊢φ∸ 2-n for all n < ω. This approximated form of strong completeness asserts that if Σ⊨φ, then proofs from Σ, being finite, can provide arbitrarily better approximations of the truth of φ. Additionally, we consider a different kind of question traditionally arising in model theory—that of decidability. When is the set of all consequences of a theory (in a countable, recursive language) recursive? Say that a complete theory T is decidable if for every sentence φ, the value φT is a recursive real, and moreover, uniformly computable from φ. If T is incomplete, we say it is decidable if for every sentence φ the real number φT∘ is uniformly recursive from φ, where φT∘ is the maximal value of φ consistent with T. As in classical first-order logic, it follows from the completeness theorem of continuous first-order logic that if a complete theory admits a recursive (or even recursively enumerable) axiomatization then it is decidable
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
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

 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 Only published works are available at libraries.
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Alexander Paseau (2010). Pure Second-Order Logic with Second-Order Identity. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (3):351-360.
Marcus Rossberg (2004). First-Order Logic, Second-Order Logic, and Completeness. In Vincent Hendricks, Fabian Neuhaus, Stig Andur Pedersen, Uwe Scheffler & Heinrich Wansing (eds.), First-Order Logic Revisited. Logos 303-321.
D. C. McCarty (1996). Undecidability and Intuitionistic Incompleteness. Journal of Philosophical Logic 25 (5):559 - 565.
Jouko Väänänen (2012). Second Order Logic or Set Theory? Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 18 (1):91-121.
Enrico Martino (1998). Negationless Intuitionism. Journal of Philosophical Logic 27 (2):165-177.
Vilém Novák (1987). First-Order Fuzzy Logic. Studia Logica 46 (1):87 - 109.

2010-09-14

19 ( #243,079 of 1,932,587 )