Consider the structure $(\mathbb{N};+,*,\uparrow,0,1)$, where $+$ denotes addition, $*$ denotes multiplication, and $\uparrow$ denotes exponentiation. Does Peano Arithmetic, augmented with the axioms $x \uparrow 0 = 1$ and $x \uparrow (y + 1) = (x \uparrow y) * x$, prove all true universally quantified equations in that structure? I know that Tarski's high school axioms fail to prove all true identities, such as Wilkie's identity. Also, if Peano arithmetic fails to prove all true identities, is there an identity that the theory proves that can't be proven from Tarski's high school axioms?
2026-03-29 17:26:59.1774805219
Does Peano Arithmetic prove all identities involving addition, multiplication, and exponentiation?
137 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in PEANO-AXIOMS
- Difference between provability and truth of Goodstein's theorem
- How Can the Peano Postulates Be Categorical If They Have NonStandard Models?
- Show that PA can prove the pigeon-hole principle
- Peano Axioms and loops
- Is it true that $0\in 1$?
- Is there a weak set theory that can prove that the natural numbers is a model of PA?
- Exercises and solutions for natural deduction proofs in Robinson and Peano arithmetic
- Proof of Strong Induction Using Well-Ordering Principle
- Some questions about the successor function
- Prove addition is commutative using axioms, definitions, and induction
Related Questions in UNIVERSAL-ALGEBRA
- What does it mean - "to derive" operation from some existing one on a particular set?
- Question on the composition of homomorphisms
- Algebraic theories, the category Set, and natural transformations
- Subdirect product of algebras
- Subdirect products
- Can we axiomatize a field starting with the binary operations and only “equational” axioms?
- What is non-algebraic structure
- $K$-free lattice on two generators where $K=\{$two element lattice$\}$
- Characterizing the algebras on $\mathbb(Z)/2\mathbb(Z)$
- Graphs in a regular category
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
There is strong evidence that the answer is yes.
What is known is that the set of identities in addition, multiplication, and exponentiation is computable. This is due to Macintyre, The laws of exponentiation; unfortunately that article is behind a paywall, so see also Gurevic's Equational theory of positive numbers with exponentiation.
Now it seems that in each case, more than just computability is proved: an explicit algorithm is exhibited and verified. This means that to check that $\mathsf{PA}$ suffices we only need to show that the arguments of one paper or the other go through in $\mathsf{PA}$. At a glance this looks doable for Gurevic's paper, and I assume the same is true of Macintyre's (in the pre-paywall part of Macintyre's paper he mentions the role of calculus, but that's probably not an issue - $\mathsf{PA}$ suffices for the arithmetic consequences of everything I can think of that would be called "basic calculus").
(As to your final question, $\mathsf{PA}$ already proves Wilkie's identity: the wiki page explains why the identity is true, and it's easy to see that that reasoning goes through in $\mathsf{PA}$.)