Tell me more ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am currently doing exercises on the Gödelian theorems; and we are confronted with the introductory puzzle of R. Smullyan's book, which is as follows:

Suppose we have a machine which prints strings over the alphabet $p, n, (, ), \neg$. The norm of a string $e$ is defined to be the string $e(e)$. Some strings are sentences, which have a truth value. Sentences are of the form $p(w), \neg p(w), \neg pn(w), pn(w)$, where $w$ is an arbitrary string. Truth values are assigned to sentences as follows:

  • $p(w)$ is true exactly if $w$ is printable,
  • $\neg p(w)$ is true exactly if $w$ is not printable,
  • $pn(w)$ is true exactly if $w(w)$ (i.e., the norm of $w$) is printable,
  • $\neg pn(w)$ is true exactly if $w(w)$ is not printable.

Smullyan concludes that the sentence $G = \neg pn(\neg pn)$ is true but not printable. Our task is now to find another sentence which is true but surely not printable. However, I don't figure out how to construct such another sentence. It is clear that such a sentence needs some kind of self-reference like the sentence $G$ above; however it seems to me that one cannot find a string $s$ different from $\neg pn$ such that the norm of $\neg pn(s)$ is exactly $\neg pn(s)$ (which would establish the self-reference).

Notice that this is homework, so I would appreciate if you gave me hints, not complete solutions.

Thanks in advance!

share|improve this question
Are there extra conditions that you're not reproducing? Otherwise I don't see what prevents $\neg pn(\neg pn)$ from being printable and false? – Henning Makholm Dec 30 '12 at 16:53
Sorry, I forgot: the machine is assumed to never print false statements, i.e., the machine is sound. – trin Dec 30 '12 at 16:54
I have the same homework and we got the hint / additional information (We are probably taking the same course? ^^): "You may use the assumption that printable strings cannot contain non-printable substrings." To me it seems that sentence opens a lot of possibilites of true and unprintable sentences. – Meera Jan 3 at 20:49
How about $G \wedge G?$ – Ross Millikan Jan 3 at 20:54

Know someone who can answer? Share a link to this question via email, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook.

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.