2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- {{{ Logic/general definitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- import basic logic definitions from <logic.pg>
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-22 10:36:51 -08:00
|
|
|
@include logic.pg
|
2024-11-20 12:24:03 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ Axioms
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- Now we can define the Peano axioms. Unlike with equality, perga is not
|
|
|
|
|
-- powerful enough to construct the natural numbers (or at least to prove the
|
|
|
|
|
-- Peano axioms as theorems from a definition constructible in perga). However,
|
|
|
|
|
-- working with axioms is extremely common in math. As such, perga has a system
|
|
|
|
|
-- for doing just that, namely the *axiom* system.
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- In a definition, rather than give a value for the term, we can give it the
|
|
|
|
|
-- value axiom, in which case a type ascription is mandatory. Perga will then
|
|
|
|
|
-- trust our type ascription, and assume going forward that the identifier we
|
|
|
|
|
-- defined is a value of the asserted type. For example, we will use the axiom
|
|
|
|
|
-- system to assert the existence of a type of natural numbers
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
axiom nat : *;
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- As you can imagine, this can be risky. For instance, there's nothing stopping
|
|
|
|
|
-- us from saying
|
|
|
|
|
-- uh_oh : false := axiom;
|
|
|
|
|
-- or stipulating more subtly contradictory axioms. As such, as in mathematics,
|
|
|
|
|
-- axioms should be used with care.
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- There's another problem with axioms, namely that perga cannot do any
|
|
|
|
|
-- computations with axioms. The more you can define within perga natively, the
|
|
|
|
|
-- better, as computations done without axioms can be utilized by perga. For
|
|
|
|
|
-- example, in <computation.pg>, we define the natural numbers as Church
|
|
|
|
|
-- numerals entirely within perga. There, the proof that 1 + 1 = 2 is just
|
|
|
|
|
-- eq_refl, since they reduce to the same thing. Here, 1 + 1 = 2 will
|
|
|
|
|
-- require a proof, since perga is unable to do computations with things defined
|
|
|
|
|
-- as axioms.
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- With these warnings in place, the Peano axioms are proven to be consistent,
|
|
|
|
|
-- so we should be fine. I'm formalizing the second order axioms given in the
|
|
|
|
|
-- wikipedia article on the Peano axioms
|
|
|
|
|
-- (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peano_axioms).
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- axiom 1: 0 is a natural number
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
axiom zero : nat;
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- axiom 6: For every n, S n is a natural number.
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
axiom suc (n : nat) : nat;
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- axiom 7: If S n = S m, then n = m.
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
axiom suc_inj : forall (n m : nat), eq nat (suc n) (suc m) -> eq nat n m;
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- axiom 8: No successor of any natural number is zero.
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
axiom suc_nonzero : forall (n : nat), not (eq nat (suc n) zero);
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- axiom 9: Induction! For any proposition P on natural numbers, if P(0) holds,
|
|
|
|
|
-- and if for every natural number n, P(n) ⇒ P(S n), then P holds for all n.
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
axiom nat_ind : forall (P : nat -> *), P zero -> (forall (n : nat), P n -> P (suc n))
|
|
|
|
|
-> forall (n : nat), P n;
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ Basic Definitions
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- Now that we have stipulated these axioms, we are free to use them to make
|
|
|
|
|
-- definitions, prove theorems, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- Our first theorem, as a warm up, is to prove that every natural number is
|
|
|
|
|
-- either 0 or the successor of another natural number.
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- First, we will make a bunch of abbreviations, since these terms get really
|
|
|
|
|
-- long and complicated really quickly.
|
2024-11-20 12:24:03 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 13:22:06 -08:00
|
|
|
-- Some abbreviations for common numbers.
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
def one : nat := suc zero;
|
|
|
|
|
def two : nat := suc one;
|
|
|
|
|
def three : nat := suc two;
|
|
|
|
|
def four : nat := suc three;
|
|
|
|
|
def five : nat := suc four;
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- First, the predecessor of n is m if n = suc m.
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
def pred (n m : nat) : * := eq nat n (suc m);
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- Our claim is a disjunction, whose first option is that n = 0.
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
def szc_l (n : nat) := eq nat n zero;
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- The second option is that n has a predecessor.
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
def szc_r (n : nat) := exists nat (pred n);
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- So the claim we are trying to prove is that either one of the above options
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- holds for every n.
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
def szc (n : nat) := or (szc_l n) (szc_r n);
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- And here's our proof!
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
def suc_or_zero : forall (n : nat), szc n :=
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
-- We will prove this by induction.
|
|
|
|
|
nat_ind szc
|
|
|
|
|
-- For the base case, the first option holds, i.e. 0 = 0
|
|
|
|
|
(or_intro_l (szc_l zero) (szc_r zero) (eq_refl nat zero))
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- For the inductive case, suppose the theorem holds for n.
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
(fun (n : nat) (_ : szc n) =>
|
2024-11-20 22:21:43 -08:00
|
|
|
-- Then the right option holds for suc n, since suc n is the
|
|
|
|
|
-- successor of n
|
2024-11-20 07:37:57 -08:00
|
|
|
or_intro_r (szc_l (suc n)) (szc_r (suc n))
|
|
|
|
|
(exists_intro nat (pred (suc n)) n (eq_refl nat (suc n))));
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ Recursive Definitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- The next step would normally be to define addition and prove properties of
|
|
|
|
|
-- addition. However, we need to take a very long and difficult detour in order
|
|
|
|
|
-- to be able to define addition in the first place. The normal way addition is
|
|
|
|
|
-- defined is by the following two equations:
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- 1) n + 0 = n
|
|
|
|
|
-- 2) n + (suc m) = suc (n + m)
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- It is clear that this definition is ok, since m gets smaller with every
|
|
|
|
|
-- application of equation 2, until m reaches zero, whereupon we can use
|
|
|
|
|
-- equation 1. This argument, while perfectly reasonable, is deceptively
|
|
|
|
|
-- difficult to formalize. It turns out that this structure of recursively
|
|
|
|
|
-- defining a function by two equations similar to 1 and 2 is extremely common.
|
|
|
|
|
-- So, we will take the time to prove the following theorem.
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- Theorem (recursive definitions):
|
|
|
|
|
-- For every type A, element z : A, and function fS : nat -> A -> A, there
|
|
|
|
|
-- exists a unique function f : nat -> A satisfying
|
|
|
|
|
-- 1) f 0 = z
|
|
|
|
|
-- 2) forall n : nat, f (suc n) = fS n (f n)
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- Once we've proved this theorem, we can easily define addition such that,
|
|
|
|
|
-- i.e. that for any fixed n : nat, "n+" is the unique function satisfying
|
|
|
|
|
-- 1) n + 0 = n
|
|
|
|
|
-- 2) forall m : nat, n + (suc m) = suc (n + m)
|
|
|
|
|
-- Notice that this is the exact form we need in order to apply the theorem.
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- However, proving this theorem is *extremely long and difficult*. I would
|
|
|
|
|
-- recommend skipping this section and coming back to it after you are much
|
|
|
|
|
-- more used to perga. As such, I will go into a lot less detail on each of
|
|
|
|
|
-- these proofs than in the later sections.
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- Here's our game plan. We will define a relation R : nat -> A -> * such that
|
|
|
|
|
-- R x y iff for every relation Q : nat -> A -> * satisfying
|
|
|
|
|
-- 1) Q 0 z and
|
|
|
|
|
-- 2) forall (x : nat) (y : A), Q x y -> Q (suc x) (fS x y),
|
|
|
|
|
-- Q x y.
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
-- In more mathy lingo, we take R to be the intersection of every relation
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- satisfying 1 and 2. From there we will, with much effort, prove that R is
|
|
|
|
|
-- actually a function satisfying the equations we want it to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
section RecursiveDefs
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 15:36:58 -08:00
|
|
|
-- First, fix an A, z : A, and fS : nat -> A -> A
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
variable (A : *) (z : A) (fS : nat -> A -> A);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- {{{ Defining R
|
|
|
|
|
-- Here is condition 1 formally expressed in perga.
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def cond1 (Q : nat -> A -> *) := Q zero z;
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Likewise for condition 2.
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def cond2 (Q : nat -> A -> *) :=
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
forall (n : nat) (y : A), Q n y -> Q (suc n) (fS n y);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- From here we can define R.
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_rel (x : nat) (y : A) :=
|
|
|
|
|
forall (Q : nat -> A -> *), cond1 Q -> cond2 Q -> Q x y;
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ R is total
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
def total (A B : *) (R : A -> B -> *) := forall (a : A), exists B (R a);
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_rel_cond1 : cond1 rec_rel :=
|
|
|
|
|
fun (Q : nat -> A -> *) (h1 : cond1 Q) (h2 : cond2 Q) => h1;
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_rel_cond2 : cond2 rec_rel :=
|
|
|
|
|
fun (n : nat) (y : A) (h : rec_rel n y)
|
|
|
|
|
(Q : nat -> A -> *) (h1 : cond1 Q) (h2 : cond2 Q) =>
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
h2 n y (h Q h1 h2);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_rel_total : total nat A rec_rel :=
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
let (P (x : nat) := exists A (rec_rel x)) in
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
nat_ind P
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
(exists_intro A (rec_rel zero) z rec_rel_cond1)
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
(fun (n : nat) (IH : P n) =>
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
exists_elim A (P (suc n)) (rec_rel n) IH
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (y0 : A) (hy : rec_rel n y0) =>
|
|
|
|
|
exists_intro A (rec_rel (suc n)) (fS n y0) (rec_rel_cond2 n y0 hy)))
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
end;
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ Defining R2
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def alt_cond1 (x : nat) (y : A) :=
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
and (eq nat x zero) (eq A y z);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def cond_y2 (x : nat) (y : A)
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
(x2 : nat) (y2 : A) :=
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
and (eq A y (fS x2 y2)) (rec_rel x2 y2);
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def cond_x2 (x : nat) (y : A) (x2 : nat) :=
|
|
|
|
|
and (pred x x2) (exists A (cond_y2 x y x2));
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def alt_cond2 (x : nat) (y : A) := exists nat (cond_x2 x y);
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_rel_alt (x : nat) (y : A) := or (alt_cond1 x y) (alt_cond2 x y);
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ R = R2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ R2 ⊆ R
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
def R2_sub_R_case1 (x : nat) (y : A) : alt_cond1 x y -> rec_rel x y :=
|
|
|
|
|
fun (case1 : alt_cond1 x y) =>
|
|
|
|
|
let (x0 := and_elim_l (eq nat x zero) (eq A y z) case1)
|
|
|
|
|
(yz := and_elim_r (eq nat x zero) (eq A y z) case1)
|
|
|
|
|
(a1 := (eq_sym A y z yz) (rec_rel zero) rec_rel_cond1)
|
|
|
|
|
in
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat x zero x0) (fun (n : nat) => rec_rel n y) a1
|
|
|
|
|
end;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def R2_sub_R_case2 (x : nat) (y : A) : alt_cond2 x y -> rec_rel x y :=
|
|
|
|
|
fun (case2 : alt_cond2 x y) =>
|
|
|
|
|
let (h1 := cond_x2 x y)
|
|
|
|
|
(h2 := cond_y2 x y)
|
|
|
|
|
in
|
|
|
|
|
exists_elim nat (rec_rel x y) h1 case2
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (x2 : nat) (hx2 : h1 x2) =>
|
|
|
|
|
let (hpred := and_elim_l (pred x x2) (exists A (h2 x2)) hx2)
|
|
|
|
|
(hex := and_elim_r (pred x x2) (exists A (h2 x2)) hx2)
|
|
|
|
|
in
|
|
|
|
|
exists_elim A (rec_rel x y) (h2 x2) hex
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (y2 : A) (hy2 : h2 x2 y2) =>
|
|
|
|
|
let (hpreim := and_elim_l (eq A y (fS x2 y2)) (rec_rel x2 y2) hy2)
|
|
|
|
|
(hR := and_elim_r (eq A y (fS x2 y2)) (rec_rel x2 y2) hy2)
|
|
|
|
|
(a1 := rec_rel_cond2 x2 y2 hR)
|
|
|
|
|
(a2 := (eq_sym A y (fS x2 y2) hpreim) (rec_rel (suc x2)) a1)
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
in
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat x (suc x2) hpred) (fun (n : nat) => rec_rel n y) a2
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
end)
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
end)
|
|
|
|
|
end;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def R2_sub_R (x : nat) (y : A) : rec_rel_alt x y -> rec_rel x y :=
|
|
|
|
|
fun (h : rec_rel_alt x y) =>
|
|
|
|
|
or_elim (alt_cond1 x y) (alt_cond2 x y) (rec_rel x y) h
|
|
|
|
|
(R2_sub_R_case1 x y)
|
|
|
|
|
(R2_sub_R_case2 x y);
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ R ⊆ R2
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def R2_cond1 : cond1 rec_rel_alt :=
|
|
|
|
|
or_intro_l (alt_cond1 zero z) (alt_cond2 zero z)
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
(and_intro (eq nat zero zero) (eq A z z)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_refl nat zero)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_refl A z));
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def R2_cond2 : cond2 rec_rel_alt :=
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
fun (x2 : nat) (y2 : A) (h : rec_rel_alt x2 y2) =>
|
|
|
|
|
let (x := suc x2)
|
|
|
|
|
(y := fS x2 y2)
|
|
|
|
|
(cx2 := cond_x2 x y)
|
|
|
|
|
(cy2 := cond_y2 x y x2)
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
in
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
or_intro_r (alt_cond1 x y) (alt_cond2 x y)
|
|
|
|
|
(exists_intro nat cx2 x2
|
|
|
|
|
(and_intro (pred x x2) (exists A cy2)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_refl nat x)
|
|
|
|
|
(exists_intro A cy2 y2
|
|
|
|
|
(and_intro (eq A y y) (rec_rel x2 y2)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_refl A y)
|
|
|
|
|
(R2_sub_R x2 y2 h)))))
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
end;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def R_sub_R2 (x : nat) (y : A) : rec_rel x y -> rec_rel_alt x y :=
|
|
|
|
|
fun (h : rec_rel x y) => h rec_rel_alt R2_cond1 R2_cond2;
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ R2 (hence R) is functional
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
def fl_in (A B : *) (R : A -> B -> *) (x : A) := forall (y1 y2 : B),
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
R x y1 -> R x y2 -> eq B y1 y2;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-01 15:29:05 -08:00
|
|
|
def fl (A B : *) (R : A -> B -> *) := forall (x : A), fl_in A B R x;
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def R2_zero (y : A) : rec_rel_alt zero y -> eq A y z :=
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
let (cx2 := cond_x2 zero y)
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
(cy2 := cond_y2 zero y)
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
in fun (h : rec_rel_alt zero y) =>
|
|
|
|
|
or_elim (alt_cond1 zero y) (alt_cond2 zero y) (eq A y z) h
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (case1 : alt_cond1 zero y) => and_elim_r (eq nat zero zero) (eq A y z) case1)
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (case2 : alt_cond2 zero y) =>
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
exists_elim nat (eq A y z) cx2 case2
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (x2 : nat) (h2 : cx2 x2) =>
|
|
|
|
|
suc_nonzero x2
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat zero (suc x2) (and_elim_l (pred zero x2) (exists A (cy2 x2)) h2))
|
|
|
|
|
(eq A y z)))
|
|
|
|
|
end;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def R2_suc (x2 : nat) (y : A) : rec_rel_alt (suc x2) y -> exists A (cond_y2 (suc x2) y x2) :=
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
let (x := suc x2)
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
(cx2 := cond_x2 x y)
|
|
|
|
|
(cy2 := cond_y2 x y)
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
(goal := exists A (cy2 x2))
|
|
|
|
|
in
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
fun (h : rec_rel_alt x y) =>
|
|
|
|
|
or_elim (alt_cond1 x y) (alt_cond2 x y) goal h
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (case1 : alt_cond1 x y) => suc_nonzero x2 (and_elim_l (eq nat x zero) (eq A y z) case1) goal)
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (case2 : alt_cond2 x y) =>
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
exists_elim nat goal cx2 case2
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (x22 : nat) (hx22 : cx2 x22) =>
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
let (hpred := and_elim_l (pred x x22) (exists A (cy2 x22)) hx22)
|
|
|
|
|
(hgoal := and_elim_r (pred x x22) (exists A (cy2 x22)) hx22)
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
(x2_x22 := suc_inj x2 x22 hpred)
|
|
|
|
|
in
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat x2 x22 x2_x22)
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (n : nat) => exists A (cy2 n))
|
|
|
|
|
hgoal
|
|
|
|
|
end))
|
|
|
|
|
end;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
def R2_functional_base_case : fl_in nat A rec_rel_alt zero :=
|
|
|
|
|
fun (y1 y2 : A) (h1 : rec_rel_alt zero y1) (h2 : rec_rel_alt zero y2) =>
|
|
|
|
|
eq_trans A y1 z y2
|
|
|
|
|
(R2_zero y1 h1)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym A y2 z (R2_zero y2 h2));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def R2_functional_inductive_step (x2 : nat) (IH : fl_in nat A rec_rel_alt x2) : fl_in nat A rec_rel_alt (suc x2) :=
|
|
|
|
|
fun (y1 y2 : A) (h1 : rec_rel_alt (suc x2) y1) (h2 : rec_rel_alt (suc x2) y2) =>
|
|
|
|
|
let (x := suc x2)
|
|
|
|
|
(cy1 := cond_y2 x y1 x2)
|
|
|
|
|
(cy2 := cond_y2 x y2 x2)
|
|
|
|
|
(goal := eq A y1 y2)
|
|
|
|
|
in
|
|
|
|
|
exists_elim A goal cy1 (R2_suc x2 y1 h1)
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (y12 : A) (h12 : cy1 y12) =>
|
|
|
|
|
exists_elim A goal cy2 (R2_suc x2 y2 h2)
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (y22 : A) (h22 : cy2 y22) =>
|
|
|
|
|
let (y1_preim := and_elim_l (eq A y1 (fS x2 y12)) (rec_rel x2 y12) h12)
|
|
|
|
|
(y2_preim := and_elim_l (eq A y2 (fS x2 y22)) (rec_rel x2 y22) h22)
|
|
|
|
|
(R_x2_y12 := and_elim_r (eq A y1 (fS x2 y12)) (rec_rel x2 y12) h12)
|
|
|
|
|
(R_x2_y22 := and_elim_r (eq A y2 (fS x2 y22)) (rec_rel x2 y22) h22)
|
|
|
|
|
(R2_x2_y12 := R_sub_R2 x2 y12 R_x2_y12)
|
|
|
|
|
(R2_x2_y22 := R_sub_R2 x2 y22 R_x2_y22)
|
|
|
|
|
(y12_y22 := IH y12 y22 R2_x2_y12 R2_x2_y22)
|
|
|
|
|
in
|
|
|
|
|
eq_trans A y1 (fS x2 y12) y2
|
|
|
|
|
y1_preim
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans A (fS x2 y12) (fS x2 y22) y2
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong A A y12 y22 (fun (y : A) => fS x2 y) y12_y22)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym A y2 (fS x2 y22) y2_preim))
|
|
|
|
|
end))
|
|
|
|
|
end;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def R2_functional : fl nat A rec_rel_alt :=
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
nat_ind (fl_in nat A rec_rel_alt) R2_functional_base_case R2_functional_inductive_step;
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def R_functional : fl nat A rec_rel :=
|
|
|
|
|
fun (n : nat) (y1 y2 : A) (h1 : rec_rel n y1) (h2 : rec_rel n y2) =>
|
|
|
|
|
R2_functional n y1 y2 (R_sub_R2 n y1 h1) (R_sub_R2 n y2 h2);
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
-- {{{ Actually defining the function
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_def (x : nat) : A :=
|
|
|
|
|
exists_elim A A (rec_rel x) (rec_rel_total x) (fun (y : A) (_ : rec_rel x y) => y);
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
-- {{{ It satisfies the properties we want it to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Kind of stupidly, we still need one more axiom. Due to how existentials are
|
|
|
|
|
-- defined, even though rec_def n is defined to be the y such that R n y, we
|
|
|
|
|
-- can't actually conclude that R n (rec_def n).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- We need to assert that, even if you "forget" that a value came from an
|
|
|
|
|
-- existential, it still satisfies the property it definitionally is supposed
|
|
|
|
|
-- to satisfy. This annoying problem would be subverted with proper Σ-types,
|
|
|
|
|
-- provided they had η-equality.
|
|
|
|
|
axiom definite_description (A : *) (P : A -> *) (h : exists A P) :
|
|
|
|
|
P (exists_elim A A P h (fun (x : A) (_ : P x) => x));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Now we can use this axiom to prove that R n (rec_def n).
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_def_sat (x : nat) : rec_rel x (rec_def x) :=
|
|
|
|
|
definite_description A (rec_rel x) (rec_rel_total x);
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def eq1 (f : nat -> A) := eq A (f zero) z;
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def eq2 (f : nat -> A) := forall (n : nat), eq A (f (suc n)) (fS n (f n));
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- f zero = z
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_def_sat_zero : eq1 rec_def := R_functional zero (rec_def zero) z (rec_def_sat zero) rec_rel_cond1;
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- f n = y -> f (suc n) = fS n y
|
2024-12-06 21:23:35 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_def_sat_suc : eq2 rec_def := fun (n : nat) =>
|
|
|
|
|
R_functional (suc n) (rec_def (suc n)) (fS n (rec_def n)) (rec_def_sat (suc n)) (rec_rel_cond2 n (rec_def n) (rec_def_sat n));
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- {{{ The function satisfying these equations is unique
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
def rec_def_unique (fS : nat -> A -> A) (f g : nat -> A) (h1f : eq1 f) (h2f : eq2 f) (h1g : eq1 g) (h2g : eq2 g)
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
: forall (n : nat), eq A (f n) (g n) :=
|
|
|
|
|
nat_ind (fun (n : nat) => eq A (f n) (g n))
|
|
|
|
|
-- base case: f 0 = g 0
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans A (f zero) z (g zero) h1f (eq_sym A (g zero) z h1g))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Inductive step
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (n : nat) (IH : eq A (f n) (g n)) =>
|
|
|
|
|
-- f (suc n) = fS n (f n)
|
|
|
|
|
-- = fS n (g n)
|
|
|
|
|
-- = g (suc n)
|
|
|
|
|
eq_trans A (f (suc n)) (fS n (f n)) (g (suc n))
|
|
|
|
|
-- f (suc n) = fS n (f n)
|
|
|
|
|
(h2f n)
|
|
|
|
|
-- fS n (f n) = g (suc n)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans A (fS n (f n)) (fS n (g n)) (g (suc n))
|
|
|
|
|
-- fS n (f n) = fS n (g n)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong A A (f n) (g n) (fS n) IH)
|
|
|
|
|
-- fS n (g n) = g (suc n)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym A (g (suc n)) (fS n (g n)) (h2g n))));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-06 13:36:14 -08:00
|
|
|
end RecursiveDefs
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
-- }}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Now we can safely define addition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- First, here's the RHS of equation 2 as a function, since it will show up
|
|
|
|
|
-- multiple times.
|
|
|
|
|
def psuc (_ r : nat) := suc r;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- And here's plus!
|
|
|
|
|
def plus (n : nat) : nat -> nat := rec_def nat n psuc;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- The first equation manifests itself as the familiar
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + 0 = 0.
|
|
|
|
|
def plus_0_r (n : nat) : eq nat (plus n zero) n :=
|
|
|
|
|
rec_def_sat_zero nat n psuc;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- The second equation, after a bit of massaging, manifests itself as the
|
|
|
|
|
-- likewise familiar
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + suc m = suc (n + m).
|
|
|
|
|
def plus_s_r (n m : nat) : eq nat (plus n (suc m)) (suc (plus n m)) :=
|
|
|
|
|
rec_def_sat_suc nat n psuc m;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-11-28 10:48:11 -08:00
|
|
|
-- -- We can now prove 1 + 1 = 2!
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
def one_plus_one_two : eq nat (plus one one) two :=
|
|
|
|
|
-- 1 + (suc zero) = suc (1 + zero) = suc one
|
|
|
|
|
eq_trans nat (plus one one) (suc (plus one zero)) two
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- 1 + (suc zero) = suc (1 + zero)
|
|
|
|
|
(plus_s_r one zero)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (1 + zero) = suc one
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong nat nat (plus one zero) one suc (plus_0_r one));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- We have successfully defined addition! Note that evaluating 1 + 1 to 2
|
|
|
|
|
-- requires a proof, unfortunately, since this computation isn't visible to
|
|
|
|
|
-- perga.
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
-- We will now prove a couple standard properties of addition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- First, associativity, namely that n + (m + p) = (n + m) + p.
|
2024-12-08 12:40:52 -08:00
|
|
|
def plus_assoc : forall (n m p : nat), eq nat (plus n (plus m p)) (plus (plus n m) p)
|
|
|
|
|
:= fun (n m : nat) =>
|
2024-12-05 18:56:41 -08:00
|
|
|
-- We prove this via induction on p for any fixed n and m.
|
|
|
|
|
nat_ind
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (p : nat) => eq nat (plus n (plus m p)) (plus (plus n m) p))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Base case: p = 0
|
|
|
|
|
-- WTS n + (m + 0) = (n + m) + 0
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + (m + 0) = n + m = (n + m) + 0
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans nat (plus n (plus m zero)) (plus n m) (plus (plus n m) zero)
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + (m + 0) = n + m
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong nat nat (plus m zero) m (fun (p : nat) => plus n p) (plus_0_r m))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + m = (n + m) + 0
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat (plus (plus n m) zero) (plus n m) (plus_0_r (plus n m))))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Inductive step: IH = n + (m + p) = (n + m) + p
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (p : nat) (IH : eq nat (plus n (plus m p)) (plus (plus n m) p)) =>
|
|
|
|
|
-- WTS n + (m + suc p) = (n + m) + suc p
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + (m + suc p) = n + suc (m + p)
|
|
|
|
|
-- = suc (n + (m + p))
|
|
|
|
|
-- = suc ((n + m) + p)
|
|
|
|
|
-- = (n + m) + suc p
|
|
|
|
|
eq_trans nat (plus n (plus m (suc p))) (plus n (suc (plus m p))) (plus (plus n m) (suc p))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + (m + suc p) = n + suc (m + p)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong nat nat (plus m (suc p)) (suc (plus m p)) (fun (a : nat) => (plus n a)) (plus_s_r m p))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + suc (m + p) = (n + m) + suc p
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans nat (plus n (suc (plus m p))) (suc (plus n (plus m p))) (plus (plus n m) (suc p))
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + suc (m + p) = suc (n + (m + p))
|
|
|
|
|
(plus_s_r n (plus m p))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (n + (m + p)) = (n + m) + suc p
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans nat (suc (plus n (plus m p))) (suc (plus (plus n m) p)) (plus (plus n m) (suc p))
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (n + (m + p)) = suc ((n + m) + p)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong nat nat (plus n (plus m p)) (plus (plus n m) p) suc IH)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc ((n + m) + p) = (n + m) + suc p
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat (plus (plus n m) (suc p)) (suc (plus (plus n m) p))
|
|
|
|
|
(plus_s_r (plus n m) p)))));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Up next is commutativity, but we will need a couple lemmas first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- First, we will show that 0 + n = n.
|
|
|
|
|
def plus_0_l : forall (n : nat), eq nat (plus zero n) n :=
|
|
|
|
|
-- We prove this by induction on n.
|
|
|
|
|
nat_ind (fun (n : nat) => eq nat (plus zero n) n)
|
|
|
|
|
-- base case: WTS 0 + 0 = 0
|
|
|
|
|
-- This is just plus_0_r 0
|
|
|
|
|
(plus_0_r zero)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- inductive case
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (n : nat) (IH : eq nat (plus zero n) n) =>
|
|
|
|
|
-- WTS 0 + (suc n) = suc n
|
|
|
|
|
-- 0 + (suc n) = suc (0 + n) = suc n
|
|
|
|
|
eq_trans nat (plus zero (suc n)) (suc (plus zero n)) (suc n)
|
|
|
|
|
-- 0 + (suc n) = suc (0 + n)
|
|
|
|
|
(plus_s_r zero n)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (0 + n) = suc n
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong nat nat (plus zero n) n suc IH));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Next, we will show that (suc n) + m = suc (n + m).
|
|
|
|
|
def plus_s_l (n : nat) : forall (m : nat), eq nat (plus (suc n) m) (suc (plus n m)) :=
|
|
|
|
|
-- We proceed by induction on m.
|
|
|
|
|
nat_ind (fun (m : nat) => eq nat (plus (suc n) m) (suc (plus n m)))
|
|
|
|
|
-- base case: (suc n) + 0 = suc (n + 0)
|
|
|
|
|
-- (suc n) + 0 = suc n = suc (n + 0)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans nat (plus (suc n) zero) (suc n) (suc (plus n zero))
|
|
|
|
|
-- (suc n) + 0 = suc n
|
|
|
|
|
(plus_0_r (suc n))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc n = suc (n + 0)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong nat nat n (plus n zero) suc
|
|
|
|
|
-- n = n + 0
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat (plus n zero) n (plus_0_r n))))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- inductive case
|
|
|
|
|
-- IH = suc n + m = suc (n + m)
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (m : nat) (IH : eq nat (plus (suc n) m) (suc (plus n m))) =>
|
|
|
|
|
-- WTS suc n + suc m = suc (n + suc m)
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc n + suc m = suc (suc n + m)
|
|
|
|
|
-- = suc (suc (n + m))
|
|
|
|
|
-- = suc (n + suc m)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans nat (plus (suc n) (suc m)) (suc (plus (suc n) m)) (suc (plus n (suc m)))
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc n + suc m = suc (suc n + m)
|
|
|
|
|
(plus_s_r (suc n) m)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (suc n + m) = suc (n + suc m)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans nat (suc (plus (suc n) m)) (suc (suc (plus n m))) (suc (plus n (suc m)))
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (suc n + m) = suc (suc (n + m))
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong nat nat (plus (suc n) m) (suc (plus n m)) suc IH)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (suc (n + m)) = suc (n + suc m)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong nat nat (suc (plus n m)) (plus n (suc m)) suc
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (n + m) = n + suc m
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat (plus n (suc m)) (suc (plus n m)) (plus_s_r n m))))));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Finally, we can prove commutativity.
|
|
|
|
|
def plus_comm (n : nat) : forall (m : nat), eq nat (plus n m) (plus m n) :=
|
|
|
|
|
-- As usual, we proceed by induction.
|
|
|
|
|
nat_ind (fun (m : nat) => eq nat (plus n m) (plus m n))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Base case: WTS n + 0 = 0 + n
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + 0 = n = 0 + n
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans nat (plus n zero) n (plus zero n)
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + 0 = n
|
|
|
|
|
(plus_0_r n)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- n = 0 + n
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat (plus zero n) n (plus_0_l n)))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Inductive step:
|
|
|
|
|
(fun (m : nat) (IH : eq nat (plus n m) (plus m n)) =>
|
|
|
|
|
-- WTS n + suc m = suc m + n
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + suc m = suc (n + m)
|
|
|
|
|
-- = suc (m + n)
|
|
|
|
|
-- = suc m + n
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans nat (plus n (suc m)) (suc (plus n m)) (plus (suc m) n)
|
|
|
|
|
-- n + suc m = suc (n + m)
|
|
|
|
|
(plus_s_r n m)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (n + m) = suc m + n
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_trans nat (suc (plus n m)) (suc (plus m n)) (plus (suc m) n)
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (n + m) = suc (m + n)
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_cong nat nat (plus n m) (plus m n) suc IH)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- suc (m + n) = suc m + n
|
|
|
|
|
(eq_sym nat (plus (suc m) n) (suc (plus m n)) (plus_s_l m n)))));
|