| |
| | 4. On Classical and Intuitionistic Theories |
 | | Namely, the simple fact that, for any natural number n, there exists a finite set S (in fact, infinitely many sets) such that the simplest equation providing a Diophantine representation of S is more complex than n, can easily be proved in most classical theories of arithmetic, e.g. |
 | | Note, on the other hand, that the limiting constant of a formalized arithmetical theory is the same whether it uses intuitionistic or classical logic. |
 | | Strictly speaking, one has to grant that the complexity of a Diophantine equation is a metamathematical property; still, I would argue that it is a fairly harmless and elementary one, compared to, say, the notions of provability and consistency, which are more often used for such unprovability results. |
| www.hf.uio.no /ifikk/filosofi/njpl/vol2no2/diophantine/node4.html (546 words) |
|