I was reading the wiki page about quantifier elimination and it says that the theory of algebraically closed fields is decidable using quantifier elimination, what I understand by this is that all the formulae about that theory has an equivalent formula without quantifiers, but I don't really understand how this is possible, could someone explain to me what this concept really means, and how it can be applied to some theory?
2025-01-12 23:45:26.1736725526
I don't understand how the theory of algebraically closed fields admits quantifier elimination
1k Views Asked by YoTengoUnLCD https://math.techqa.club/user/yotengounlcd/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in LOGIC
- how does complicated truth tables work?
- Implication in mathematics - How can A imply B when A is False?
- Different Quantifiers, same variable
- Elimination of quantifiers in the strucure of polynomials and in the structure of exponentials
- What are the prerequisites for "Systems of Logic Based on Ordinals (1938)" by Turing?
- Help with Prover9 for weak propositional systems
- State machine scenario: finding invariant
- “You cannot... unless...” and “You can... only if...”
- Quantifiers and If then statements
- Show that $\forall x\varphi\vDash\varphi[t/x]$ may not hold if $t$ is bound for $x$ in $\varphi$.
Related Questions in FIRST-ORDER-LOGIC
- Different Quantifiers, same variable
- Elimination of quantifiers in the strucure of polynomials and in the structure of exponentials
- Quantifiers and If then statements
- Proving that two interpretations are isomorphic implies the structures induced by them are isomorphic.
- How to give a formal proof for $ \exists \space x\space \forall \space y(P(x) \rightarrow P(y))$ in fitch
- Formal Proofs of Logic
- First-Order Structure Logic
- I don't understand how the theory of algebraically closed fields admits quantifier elimination
- first order expressions on graphs
- What is the difference between these two FOL statements?
Related Questions in QUANTIFIERS
- Different Quantifiers, same variable
- Elimination of quantifiers in the strucure of polynomials and in the structure of exponentials
- How to give a formal proof for $ \exists \space x\space \forall \space y(P(x) \rightarrow P(y))$ in fitch
- How do you read this logical statement and verify its truth value? Nested quantifiers
- Meaning of ordering of existential and universal quantifiers
- Determine the truth value of these predicates:
- discrete mathematics nested quantifiers
- How to prove logical equivalency of two propositions that have quantifiers?
- I don't understand how the theory of algebraically closed fields admits quantifier elimination
- How exactly are these two formulas different from each other? (One is valid and the other is invalid)
Related Questions in QUANTIFIER-ELIMINATION
- Elimination of quantifiers in the strucure of polynomials and in the structure of exponentials
- I don't understand how the theory of algebraically closed fields admits quantifier elimination
- Quantifier elimination for theory of equivalence relations
- Simplifying theories with quantifier elimination
- Elimination of quantifiers
- Quantifier elimination in infinitary languages
- Hodges exercise 2.7.1: Quantifier elimination in dense linear orderings
- If $\mathcal{T}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_2$ admit quantifier elimination, does $\mathcal{T}$ admit quantifier elimination?
- A test for quantifier elimination
- Composing relation with identity yields original relation
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- 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?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- 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
- A community project: prove (or disprove) that $\sum_{n\geq 1}\frac{\sin(2^n)}{n}$ is convergent
- Alternative way of expressing a quantied statement with "Some"
Popular # Hahtags
real-analysis
calculus
linear-algebra
probability
abstract-algebra
integration
sequences-and-series
combinatorics
general-topology
matrices
functional-analysis
complex-analysis
geometry
group-theory
algebra-precalculus
probability-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
limits
analysis
number-theory
measure-theory
elementary-number-theory
statistics
multivariable-calculus
functions
derivatives
discrete-mathematics
differential-geometry
inequality
trigonometry
Popular Questions
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- Difference between "≈", "≃", and "≅"
- Easy way of memorizing values of sine, cosine, and tangent
- How to calculate the intersection of two planes?
- What does "∈" mean?
- If you roll a fair six sided die twice, what's the probability that you get the same number both times?
- Probability of getting exactly 2 heads in 3 coins tossed with order not important?
- Fourier transform for dummies
- Limit of $(1+ x/n)^n$ when $n$ tends to infinity
Here is an example of quantifier elimination in action in the case of algebraically closed fields. Consider the question of whether a polynomial (of degree $3$, say) has a root. We can express this as a formula in the first-order language of rings (which is usually taken to consist of binary operations $+$ and $\cdot$, a unary operation $-$, and constants $0$ and $1$) as $$\exists x (ax^3+bx^2+cx+d=0).$$ Here $a$, $b$, $c$, and $d$ are all free variables. Quantifier elimination says that the condition on $a$, $b$, $c$, and $d$, that a root exists can be expressed in the language of rings without using any quantifiers. How do we do this? Well, because we are in an algebraically closed field, we just need to know that the polynomial is not a nonzero constant, that is: $$\neg (a=0)\vee \neg (b=0)\vee\neg(c=0)\vee (d=0).$$
Or for a slightly more complicated example, consider the formula $$\exists x\exists y (ax^2+bx+c=0)\wedge (ay^2+by+c=0)\wedge\neg(x=y)$$ with free variables $a$, $b$, and $c$. This says that a quadratic polynomial has two distinct roots. In this case, we know that this is equivalent to the discriminant being nonzero (and also $a$ being nonzero, or else all the coefficients being zero), i.e. $$(\neg(a=0)\wedge\neg(b^2-4ac=0))\vee((a=0)\wedge(b=0)\wedge(c=0)).$$
In general, a quantifier-free formula must just be a Boolean combination of equations between polynomials in the free variables. Quantifier elimination says that any first-order formula in some free variables is equivalent to such a quantifier-free formula. This is a very strong and not at all obvious statement! For the examples above it was easy, but if I give you some really complicated statement with 12 nested quantifiers, it's quite impressive to know that it is equivalent to some equalities and inequalities between polynomials in the free variables!