For unrestricted consistency self-strengthening is inconsistent, again take . In the axiom and the preceding implication prove . The additional rule then proves .
However consistency of an extension implies consistency of its subtheory by the formalized inclusion of proofs: . Thus the ordinary theory contains and derives , so it has a finite contradiction proof. Checking that concrete proof in arithmetic gives . This theorem is also present in , contradicting the result of the new rule. Therefore is inconsistent.
The error in the added rule is its unrestricted internal use on arbitrary arithmetically presented systems, including systems containing false consistency assertions. A true external consistency progression for a specified sound system is not this unrestricted inference rule.
Articles by others on the same topic
There are currently no matching articles.