On the Inconsistency of Mumma's Eu

Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 53 (1):27-52 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In several articles, Mumma has presented a formal diagrammatic system Eu meant to give an account of one way in which Euclid's use of diagrams in the Elements could be formalized. However, largely because of the way in which it tries to limit case analysis, this system ends up being inconsistent, as shown here. Eu also suffers from several other problems: it is unable to prove several wide classes of correct geometric claims and contains a construction rule that is probably computationally intractable and that may not even be decidable



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,726

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Proofs, pictures, and Euclid.John Mumma - 2010 - Synthese 175 (2):255 - 287.
On automating diagrammatic proofs of arithmetic arguments.Mateja Jamnik, Alan Bundy & Ian Green - 1999 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 8 (3):297-321.
Calculus CL as a Formal System.Jens Lemanski & Ludger Jansen - 2020 - In Ahti Veikko Pietarinen, Peter Chapman, Leonie Bosveld-de Smet, Valeria Giardino, James Corter & Sven Linker (eds.), Diagrammatic Representation and Inference. Diagrams 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 12169. 2020. pp. 445-460.
Reasoning with Sentences and Diagrams.Eric Hammer - 1994 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 35 (1):73-87.


Added to PP

42 (#376,918)

6 months
7 (#621,576)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?