foundations

# Contents

## Definition

The weak limited principle of omniscience ($WLPO$) states that the universal quantification of any decidable proposition is again decidable. That is,

$(\forall x, P(x) \vee \neg{P(x)}) \Rightarrow (\forall x, P(x)) \vee \neg(\forall x, P(x)).$

Equivalently, that the negation of the existential quantifier of any decidable proposition is decidable:

$(\forall x, P(x) \vee \neg{P(x)}) \Rightarrow (\neg \exists x, P(x)) \vee \neg(\neg \exists x, P(x)).$

If one takes the domains of quantification to be subsingletons, one get weak excluded middle $\neg p \vee \neg \neg p$ ($WEM$), which is weaker than $EM$; conversely, $WEM$ implies $WLPO$ (over any domain). Again, Bishop's $WLPO$ takes the domain to be $\mathbb{N}$, giving a principle weaker than $WEM$ (and also weaker than $LPO_{\mathbb{N}}$).

## In the internal logic

In set theory, there are actually two different notions of logic: there is the external predicate logic used to define the set theory itself, and there is the internal predicate logic induced by the set operations on subsingletons and injections. In particular,

• An internal proposition is a set $P$ such that for all elements $x \in A$ and $y \in A$, $x = y$.

• The internal proposition true is a singleton $\top$.

• The internal proposition false is the empty set

• The internal conjunction of two internal propositions $P$ and $Q$ is the cartesian product $P \times Q$ of $P$ and $Q$.

• The internal disjunction of two internal propositions $P$ and $Q$ is the image of the unique function $!_{P \uplus Q}:P \uplus Q \to 1$ from the disjoint union of $P$ and $Q$ to the singleton $\top$.

$P \vee Q = \mathrm{im}(!_{P \uplus Q})$
• The internal implication of two internal propositions $P$ and $Q$ is the function set $P \to Q$ between $P$ and $Q$.

• The internal negation of an internal proposition $P$ is the function set from $P$ to the empty set

$\neg P = P \to \emptyset$
• An internal proposition $P$ is a decidable proposition if it comes with a function $\chi_P:P \to 2$ from $P$ to the boolean domain $2$.

• An internal predicate on a set $A$ is a set $P$ with injection $i:P \hookrightarrow A$, whose family of propositions indexed by $x \in A$ is represented by the preimages $i^*(x)$.

• The internal existential quantifier of an internal predicate $i:P \hookrightarrow A$ is the image of the unique function $!_P:P \to \top$ into the singleton $\top$.

$\exists_A P = \im(!_P)$
$\forall_A P = \{f \in P^A \vert \forall x \in A, f(x) \in i^*(x) \}$
• An internal predicate $i:P \hookrightarrow A$ is a decidable proposition if it comes with a function $\chi_P(x):i^*(x) \to 2$ into the boolean domain for all elements $x \in A$, or equivalently if it comes with a function $\chi_P:A \to 2$ from $A$ to the boolean domain $2$.

Then the internal WLPO for a family of sets $(A_z)_{z \in I}$ is the WLPO for each $A_z$ stated in the internal logic of the set theory:

• For any internal predicate $i:P \hookrightarrow A_z$, if there is a function $\chi_P:A_z \to 2$, then the internal universal quantification of $P$, $\forall_{A_z} P = \{f \in P^{A_z} \vert \forall x \in A_z, f(x) \in i^*(x) \}$ has a function $(\forall_{A_z} P) \to 2$ into the boolean domain.

or equivalently

• For any function $a:A_z \to 2$, the internal universal quantification of $P = \{x \in A_z \vert a(x) = 1\}$, $\forall_{A_z} P = \{f \in P^{A_z} \vert \forall x \in A_z, f(x) \in i^*(x) \}$ has a function $(\forall_{A_z} P) \to 2$ into the boolean domain.

The internal versions of the weak limited principle of omniscience, like all internal versions of axioms, are weaker than the external version of the the weak limited principle of omniscience, since while bounded separation implies that one can convert any external predicate $x \in A \vdash P(x)$ on a set $A$ to an internal predicate $\{x \in A \vert P(x)\} \hookrightarrow A$, it is generally not possible to convert an internal predicate to an external predicate without a reflection rule which turns subsingletons in the set theory into propositions in the external logic.

## Equivalent statements

There are various other results that are equivalent to the weak limited principle of omniscience. Here are a few:

### Truncated and untruncated versions in dependent type theory

In the context of dependent type theory, the weak limited principle of omniscience can be translated in two ways, by interpreting “or” as propositionally truncated (“merely or”) or untruncated (“purely or”). Truncated WLPO and untruncated WLPO are equivalent to each other.

• $WLPO$ follows from LPO, but not conversely. If $P(x)$ is a decidable proposition, then so is $\neg{P(x)}$, and so $LPO$ gives

$(\exists x, \neg{P(x)}) \vee (\forall x, \neg{\neg{P(x)}}),$

which implies

$\neg(\forall x, P(x)) \vee (\forall x, P(x))$

as $P$ is decidable.

• The LLPO follows from WLPO, since WLPO is equivalent to untruncated LLPO, which implies truncated LLPO. However, the converse does not necessarily hold, since in http://www1.maths.leeds.ac.uk/~rathjen/Lifschitz.pdf is a model by Michael Rathjen that separates WLPO from LLPO. Similarly, Grossack 24 shows that Johnstone’s topological topos separates WLPO from LLPO.

## References

Created on July 27, 2024 at 15:57:54. See the history of this page for a list of all contributions to it.