Scribd
Upload
135 views4 pages

On A Theorem of Wajsberg

- Mordchaj Wajsberg obtained a theorem in 1930 in his Warsaw PhD dissertation that proved no subsystem of classical propositional logic can be axiomatized using axioms with at most two propositional variables. - This theorem was later independently proven algebraically by Diamond and McKinsey in 1947, though Wajsberg obtained it first. - Wajsberg, along with logicians like Sobociński, were pioneers in the field of axiomatics for fragments of classical propositional logic in early 20th century Poland.

Uploaded by

AdrianRezus
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
135 views4 pages

On A Theorem of Wajsberg

- Mordchaj Wajsberg obtained a theorem in 1930 in his Warsaw PhD dissertation that proved no subsystem of classical propositional logic can be axiomatized using axioms with at most two propositional variables. - This theorem was later independently proven algebraically by Diamond and McKinsey in 1947, though Wajsberg obtained it first. - Wajsberg, along with logicians like Sobociński, were pioneers in the field of axiomatics for fragments of classical propositional logic in early 20th century Poland.

Uploaded by

AdrianRezus
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

On a theorem of Mordchaj

Wajsberg
ADRIAN REZUS·WEDNESDAY, JULY 4, 2018

On a theorem of Mordchaj Wajsberg (1930)

Not too long ago, I encountered (@ Facebook!) a young man from the States
who claimed he can axiomatize classical propositional logic with a single
axiom, and modus ponens plus substitution as the only rules of inference.
Well, this was well-known since about 1925. The result follows from a more
general theorem of Alfred Tarski (1925), published without proof in 1930.
(Among other things, this shows that Tarski was interested in proof theory, as
well, at an early stage of his logico-matematical carrer.)

Aside. I was able to prove Tarski's (general) claim of 1925 by lambda-calculus


methods, much later, in 1979. See my paper `On a theorem of Tarski', Lib.
Math. [Arlington TX] 2, 1982, or else my note `Tarski's claim: thirty years
later' (2010) [both can be found online, by the way]. My proof was, in fact, a
kind of kindergarten exercise in lambda-calculus: it is a typical application of
[typed] lambda-calculus to logic / proof-theory proper. Once we know the
`general theory’ (on bases, generators and the like, in lambda-calculus /
combinatory logic), we can obtain plenty of such `results' combinatorially. --
In fact, Tarski’s supposed `method’ generated only very special cases in point.
This follows from the explicit examples (including Tarski’s original
construction) reported by Bolesław Sobociński in his Warsaw Master’s thesis of
1932 (I am currently preparing a commented edition of it). -- But, in 1925,
[typed] lambda-calculus was not yet invented [!], so only God knows how did
Tarski obtain his result. (See also the brief discussion appearing at the end of
my note of 2010.)

The funny thing was that my young [FB-] friend's supposed single axiom
contained a single propositional variable (p, say)!
That was impossible, I exclaimed -- without even looking at his `argument' --,
in view of a well-known (algebraic) result, obtaind by A. H. Diamond and J. C.
C. McKinsey in 1947 -- actually a corollary of it --, saying that any axiom
system for (an arbitrary, finitely axiomatizable fragment of classical)
propositional logic must contain at least one axiom with at least _three_
distinct propositional variables! (Cf. A. H. Diamond, and J. C. C. McKinsey,
`Algebras and their subalgebras', in: Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 53, 1947, pp. 959--
962.) The fact in itself is a bit curious (why three and not... four?), but... that’s
it!

The young man didn't believe me, and claimed Diamond and McKinsey were
wrong! (Poor McKinsey!) As I was unable to follow his `argument', I gave up
after a while...

Now, I was wrong too, but on... credits / authorship, not on the theorem itself!
Because the [three-variables] result was actually obtained, first, about
seventeen years before Diamond & McKinsey, in 1930, by Mordchaj Wajsberg
(1902--1942), a former PhD student of Jan Łukasiewicz, in his Warsaw PhD
dissertation (published partially in 1931).

So I should have said `Wajsberg's theorem', instead! Voilà :

``Wajsberg accomplished his Ph.D. project in less than a year [1929--1930],


entitled his manuscript `Axiomatization of the three-valued propositional
logic', and submitted it oficially to the Warsaw University in fulfilment of the
requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. [...]

In his thesis Wajsberg also proved that no subsystems of classical


propositional logic can be axiomatized with the help of axioms built up of at
most two propositional variables. An algebraic proof of this fact was given by
A. H. Diamond and J. C. C. McKinsey in 1947. [See ref. above.]

A paper based on the results contained in Wajsberg's thesis was presented by


Łukasiewicz to the Warsaw Scientific Society for publication as early as
January 19, 1931. It appeared in the Proceedings of the Society in the same
year (see Morchaj Wajsberg, `Axiomatization of the three-valued propositional
calculus' [Polish], in: Comptes Rendus des séances de la Société des Sciences et
des Lettres de Varsovie 23, 1931, pp. 126--145. [*])

Formal defence of Wajsberg's Ph.D. thesis followed, with Łukasiewicz and S.


Mazurkiewicz as referees, and the degree of Doctor of Philosophy was
conferred upon him at ceremony on May 29, 1931.'' (From: Stanisław J. Surma,
pp. 105--106 of his paper `The logical work of Morchaj Wajsberg', in: Jan
Srzednicki (ed.), `Initiatives in Logic', Martinus Nijhoff Publishers [Kluwer
Academic Publishers], Dordrecht, Boston & Lancaster 1987 [Reason &
Argument 2], pp. 101--115. [**]) Noteworthy, both Wajsberg and Sobociński
(who was a bit younger, b. in 1906) were true encyclopedists (!) on axiomatics
matters (for fragments of classical propositional logic), likely to be only
surpassed by Carew A. Meredith (1904--1976), a post-war Irish student of
Łukasiewicz in Dublin, around the early fifties and later. Tarski apparently lost
interest in such... trifles, after 1939 or so, when he moved to the States (and to
model-theory, eventually). Yet he pursued the subject later on, even during the
seventies, although in an algebraic dressing, more or less. (Around 1938, he
was still interested in [re-] axiomatizing abelian groups, for instance. Etc.) The
point is that axiomatics is not... as boring as it seems at a first look [!], as long
as we are thinking in terms of proofs (technically, a matter of lambda-calculus,
and conceptually, a matter of... thinking about logic, properly!), rather than in
terms of formulas and / or propositions. [***] ___

[*] For an English translation, see Storrs McCall (ed.), `Polish Logic 1920--
1939', Clarendon Press, Oxford 1967, pp. 264--284. Apparenly, the editor (also
a co-translator of the paper) was not aware of the alternative algebraic proof of
Diamond and McKinsey (1948).

[**] Surma also published an edition of the `Logical Works' of Wajsberg, in


English, at Ossolineum Wroclaw [Poland], in 1977. For details, see, e.g., the
review of Storrs McCall in: JSL 48, 1983, pp. 873--874. (Otheriwse, Surma
published two shorter bio-bibliographical notes on Wajsberg, before 1987, but
the paper in the Srzednicki-collection, cited above, includes the previous
information.) [***] More on this, with both technicalities and historical details,
in a longer forthcoming set of notes on `Polish’ logic / proof theory and its vast
connections abroad. Ultimately, the `origins of modern proof theory’ (as I used
to fashion one of my preferred subjects, in recent times) are, mostly, rooted in
the early Polish logical tradition, rather than in... Göttingen, say! [A
bibliographical aside. On this, I got, yesterday -- in fact, a few hour ago --,
from Poland, the excellent monograph of Jacek Jadacki `Stanisław Leśniewski:
genius logiki’, Epigram, Bydgoszcz 2016 [381 pp.], copiously documenting
Leśniewski from the point of view of his contemporaries, former students,
colleagues, etc. (Tarski was the only PhD student of Leśniewski, by the way.)
The eminent people mentioned above -- Wajsberg, Sobociński -- et al. have
grown up in the shadow of the great master. Actually, even the `single axiom’
problem, and the issue of the `economy of means’ in axiomatics are directly
derived from Leśniewski.]

[20180704]

You might also like