Propositional calculus under adjointness (Q1867660)

In this paper the author develops a formal system for the class of implications \(A\) and conjunctions \(K\), on partially ordered sets \((L, \leq)\) with top element 1, such that \(A\) and \(K\) are related by adjointness, which means that \(y \leq A(x,z)\) iff \(K(x,y) \leq z\). \(A\) and \(K\) satisfy the neutrality principle (i.e. 1 is their left identity element). The resulting logic is called propositional calculus under adjointness, abbreviated as AdjPC. Most algebraic theorems on those \((L, \leq), A \) and \(K\) are inequalities in the posets \((L, \leq)\) of truth values. The paper describes means for abstracting inequalities within syntax; which must be free from partial truth values. This is achieved by employing a further, implication-like adjoint \(H\) of \(A\) and \(K\) (\( y \leq A(x,z)\) iff \( x \leq H(y,z)\)), whereby the partial order of \((L, \leq)\) coincides with the binary relation \(H(\cdot, \cdot) = 1\) (i.e. \(H(y,z)=1\) iff \(y \leq z\)). Accordingly, the semantical domain for AdjPC is the class of all such quintuples \((L, \leq ,A,K,H)\), which are called adjointness algebras. The axiom scheme for AdjPC consists of seven axioms. Since AdjPC is too general, it may be the case that no finite set of axioms can complete AdjPC if inference is carried out by means of modus ponens (MP) alone. As a result, four inference rules for AdjPC have to be considered; namely, MP and three bits of the substitution theorem. A list of essential theorems and inferences in AdjPC are deduced to delineate its basic structure. This enables the author to establish the completeness of AdjPC for the semantical domain of adjointness algebras, by means of a quotient-algebra structure (a Lindenbaum type of algebra). It is shown how certain models can help disprove some incorrect inferences in AdjPC. The paper concludes with the presentation of a complete syntax (with fewer axioms and inference rules) for the smaller semantical domain of all adjointness algebras whose implications satisfy the exchange principle (i.e. \(A(x,A(y,z))=A(y,A(x,z))\)).