BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Saeed Salehi

Saeed Salehi appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
math.LO

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
1topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

On the Truth of Gödelian and Rosserian Sentences

There is a longstanding debate in the logico-philosophical community as to why the Gödelian sentences of a consistent and sufficiently strong theory are true. The prevalent argument seems to be something like this: since every one of the Gödelian sentences of such a theory is equivalent to the theory's consistency statement, even provably so inside the theory, the truth of those sentences follows from the consistency of the theory in question. So, Gödelian sentences of consistent theories should be true. In this paper, we show that Gödelian sentences of only sound theories are true; and there is a long road from consistency to soundness, indeed a hierarchy of conditions which are satisfied by some theories and falsified by others. We also study the truth of Rosserian sentences and provide necessary and sufficient conditions for the truth of Rosserian (and also Gödelian) sentences of theories.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Sometime a Paradox, Now Proof: Non-First-Order-izability of Yablo's Paradox

Paradoxes are interesting puzzles in philosophy and mathematics, and they could be even more fascinating, when turned into proofs and theorems. For example, Liar's paradox can be translated into a propositional tautology, and Barber's paradox turns into a first-order tautology. Russell's paradox, which collapsed Frege's foundational framework, is now a classical theorem in set theory, implying that no set of all sets can exist. Paradoxes can be used in proofs of some other theorems; Liar's paradox has been used in the classical proof of Tarski's theorem on the undefinability of truth in sufficiently rich languages. This paradox (and also Richard's paradox) appears implicitly in Gödel's proof of his celebrated first incompleteness theorem. In this paper, we study Yablo's paradox from the viewpoint of first and second order logics. We prove that a formalization of Yablo's paradox (which is second-order in nature) is non-first-order-izable in the sense of George Boolos (1984).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Tarski's Undefinability Theorem and Diagonal Lemma

We prove the equivalence of the semantic version of Tarski's theorem on the undefinability of truth with a semantic version of the Diagonal Lemma, and also show the equivalence of syntactic Tarski's Undefinability Theorem with a weak syntactic diagonal lemma. We outline two seemingly diagonal-free proofs for these theorems from the literature, and show that syntactic Tarski's theorem can deliver Gödel-Rosser's Incompleteness Theorem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access