Principles of Mathematical Logic is the 1950 American translation of the 1938 second edition of David Hilbert's and Wilhelm Ackermann's classic text Grundzüge der theoretischen Logik, on elementary mathematical logic. The 1928 first edition thereof is considered the first elementary text clearly grounded in the formalism now known as first-order logic (FOL). Hilbert and Ackermann also formalized FOL in a way that subsequently achieved canonical status. FOL is now a core formalism of mathematical logic, and is presupposed by contemporary treatments of Peano arithmetic and nearly all treatments of axiomatic set theory.
The 1928 edition included a clear statement of the Entscheidungsproblem (decision problem) for FOL, and also asked whether that logic was complete (i.e., whether all semantic truths of FOL were theorems derivable from the FOL axioms and rules). The first problem was answered in the negative by Alonzo Church in 1936. The second was answered affirmatively by Kurt Gödel in 1929.
The text also touched on set theory and relational algebra as ways of going beyond FOL. Contemporary notation for logic owes more to this text than it does to the notation of Principia Mathematica, long popular in the English speaking world.
Famous quotes containing the words principles of, principles, mathematical and/or logic:
“The principles of the good society call for a concern with an order of being—which cannot be proved existentially to the sense organs—where it matters supremely that the human person is inviolable, that reason shall regulate the will, that truth shall prevail over error.”
—Walter Lippmann (1889–1974)
“Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man’s appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded.”
—Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865)
“An accurate charting of the American woman’s progress through history might look more like a corkscrew tilted slightly to one side, its loops inching closer to the line of freedom with the passage of time—but like a mathematical curve approaching infinity, never touching its goal. . . . Each time, the spiral turns her back just short of the finish line.”
—Susan Faludi (20th century)
“The usefulness of madmen is famous: they demonstrate society’s logic flagrantly carried out down to its last scrimshaw scrap.”
—Cynthia Ozick (b. 1928)