Axiomatizations of hyperbolic geometry: A comparison based on language and quantifier type complexity

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Hyperbolic geometry can be axiomatized using the notions of order and congruence (as in Euclidean geometry) or using the notion of incidence alone (as in projective geometry). Although the incidence-based axiomatization may be considered simpler because it uses the single binary point-line relation of incidence as a primitive notion, we show that it is syntactically more complex. The incidence-based formulation requires some axioms of the quantifier-type ∀∃∀, while the axiom system based on congruence and order can be formulated using only ∀∃-axioms.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)331-341
Number of pages11
JournalSynthese
Volume133
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2002

Fingerprint

axiomatization
incidence
mathematics
language
Axiomatization
Quantifiers
Language
Congruence
Geometry
Axiom
Syntax
Euclidean Geometry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)

Cite this

Axiomatizations of hyperbolic geometry : A comparison based on language and quantifier type complexity. / Pambuccian, Victor.

In: Synthese, Vol. 133, No. 3, 12.2002, p. 331-341.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f052378d3fdb4a41b4ac86970c5de97c,
title = "Axiomatizations of hyperbolic geometry: A comparison based on language and quantifier type complexity",
abstract = "Hyperbolic geometry can be axiomatized using the notions of order and congruence (as in Euclidean geometry) or using the notion of incidence alone (as in projective geometry). Although the incidence-based axiomatization may be considered simpler because it uses the single binary point-line relation of incidence as a primitive notion, we show that it is syntactically more complex. The incidence-based formulation requires some axioms of the quantifier-type ∀∃∀, while the axiom system based on congruence and order can be formulated using only ∀∃-axioms.",
author = "Victor Pambuccian",
year = "2002",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1023/A:1021294808742",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "133",
pages = "331--341",
journal = "Synthese",
issn = "0039-7857",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Axiomatizations of hyperbolic geometry

T2 - A comparison based on language and quantifier type complexity

AU - Pambuccian, Victor

PY - 2002/12

Y1 - 2002/12

N2 - Hyperbolic geometry can be axiomatized using the notions of order and congruence (as in Euclidean geometry) or using the notion of incidence alone (as in projective geometry). Although the incidence-based axiomatization may be considered simpler because it uses the single binary point-line relation of incidence as a primitive notion, we show that it is syntactically more complex. The incidence-based formulation requires some axioms of the quantifier-type ∀∃∀, while the axiom system based on congruence and order can be formulated using only ∀∃-axioms.

AB - Hyperbolic geometry can be axiomatized using the notions of order and congruence (as in Euclidean geometry) or using the notion of incidence alone (as in projective geometry). Although the incidence-based axiomatization may be considered simpler because it uses the single binary point-line relation of incidence as a primitive notion, we show that it is syntactically more complex. The incidence-based formulation requires some axioms of the quantifier-type ∀∃∀, while the axiom system based on congruence and order can be formulated using only ∀∃-axioms.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=18744404058&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=18744404058&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1023/A:1021294808742

DO - 10.1023/A:1021294808742

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:18744404058

VL - 133

SP - 331

EP - 341

JO - Synthese

JF - Synthese

SN - 0039-7857

IS - 3

ER -