Tarski's Undefinability Theorem and Diagonal Lemma

Saeed Salehi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzab016

2020-09-15

Abstract: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.

Logic

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to prove the equivalence between Tarski's Undefinability Theorem and the Diagonal Lemma in semantic form, as well as the equivalence between their syntactic forms. Specifically:

1. **Equivalence in semantic form**:
- The author has proven that the semantic form of Tarski's Undefinability Theorem is equivalent to the semantic form of the Diagonal Lemma. That is, for any formula \(\Psi(x)\), there exists a sentence \(\theta\) such that \(N\models\Psi(\ulcorner\theta\urcorner)\leftrightarrow\theta\) holds if and only if the set of true arithmetic sentences is not definable in the standard model \(N\) of natural numbers.

2. **Equivalence in syntactic form**:
- The author has also proven that the syntactic form of Tarski's Undefinability Theorem is equivalent to the weak syntactic form of the Diagonal Lemma. That is, for any formula \(\Psi(x)\), there exists a sentence \(\theta\) such that \(\Psi(\ulcorner\theta\urcorner)\leftrightarrow\theta\) is compatible with some consistent theory \(T\) if and only if \(T\) does not contain all the true biconditionals \(\{\Psi(\ulcorner\beta\urcorner)\leftrightarrow\beta\mid\beta\text{ is a sentence}\}\).

In addition, the paper also explores different proof methods of these theorems and provides two seemingly diagonal - free proofs to enhance the understanding of these theorems. These proofs are not only helpful for understanding the essence of the Diagonal Lemma, but can also provide a new perspective for proving Gödel - Rosser's Incompleteness Theorem.