1
$\begingroup$

The Peano axiom of induction for natural numbers says that For any property $P(n)$ , if $P(0)$ holds, and that whenever $P(n)$ holds, $P(n++)$ holds, then $P(n)$ holds for all natural numbers.

Can this be replaced by

"For every natural number $n$ not equal to $0$, there exists another natural number $m$ such that $m++ = n$" ?

What are the problems associated with replacing this?

I am following Terence Tao's book Analysis I.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The axiom of induction offers a principle for proving some statement $P$ for the natural numbers. Your "axiom" does not even refer to some property $P$ to be proven over the natural numbers... How are the two connected? $\endgroup$ – frabala Mar 17 at 10:04
  • $\begingroup$ One of the reasons mentioned in the book to use the axiom of induction was to remove superfluous/extra elements. For example, the set Z = (0, 0++, 0++++, ........, x, x++, x++++.....) follows the previous axioms (where x is not a natural number). We could eliminate x and its increments by what I wrote in the suggestion. What I want to know is how does the induction axiom add more than just removing superfluous elements. $\endgroup$ – Kosha Modi Mar 18 at 10:13
1
$\begingroup$

Let $N=\{-1\}\times\mathbb N\cup\{1\}\times\mathbb Z$. If $(\pm1,m)\in N$, then let $(\pm1,m)++=(\pm1,m+1)$. Then all the Peano axioms (with the induction one replaced by yours) hold (assuming that $0=(-1,0)$), but what we have here is something which is different from the naturals. For instance, induction doesn't hold here.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.