Let be a topological space and *X a nonstandard extension of X. Sets of the form *G, where G $\in$ T. form a base for the "standard" topology $^ST$ on *X. The topological space will be used to study compactifications of in a systematic way.

We provide a solution to the well-known “Shooting-Room” paradox, developed by John Leslie in connection with his Doomsday Argument. In the “Shooting-Room” paradox, the death of an individual is contingent upon an event that has a 1/36 chance of occurring, yet the relative frequency of death in the relevant population is 0.9. There are two intuitively plausible arguments, one concluding that the appropriate subjective probability of death is 1/36, the other that this probability is 0.9. How are these two values (...) to be reconciled? We show that only the first argument is valid for a standard, countably additive probability distribution. However, both lines of reasoning are legitimate if probabilities are non-standard. The subjective probability of death rises from 1/36 to 0.9 by conditionalizing on an event that is not measurable, or whose probability is zero. Thus we can sometimes meaningfully ascribe conditional probabilities even when the event conditionalized upon is not of positive finite (or even infinitesimal) measure. (shrink)

The 'best-system' analysis of lawhood [Lewis 1994] faces the 'zero-fit problem': that many systems of laws say that the chance of history going actually as it goes--the degree to which the theory 'fits' the actual course of history--is zero. Neither an appeal to infinitesimal probabilities nor a patch using standard measure theory avoids the difficulty. But there is a way to avoid it: replace the notion of 'fit' with the notion of a world being typical with respect to a theory.

– We offer a new motivation for imprecise probabilities. We argue that there are propositions to which precise probability cannot be assigned, but to which imprecise probability can be assigned. In such cases the alternative to imprecise probability is not precise probability, but no probability at all. And an imprecise probability is substantially better than no probability at all. Our argument is based on the mathematical phenomenon of non-measurable sets. Non-measurable propositions cannot receive precise probabilities, but there is a natural (...) way for them to receive imprecise probabilities. The mathematics of non-measurable sets is arcane, but its epistemological import is far-reaching; even apparently mundane propositions are liable to be affected by non-measurability. The phenomenon of non-measurability dramatically reshapes the dialectic between critics and proponents of imprecise credence. Non-measurability offers natural rejoinders to prominent critics of imprecise credence. Non-measurability even reverses some of the critics’ arguments—by the very lights that have been used to argue against imprecise credences, imprecise credences are better than precise credences. (shrink)

A popular method for comparing the structures of mathematical objects, which I call the ‘subset approach’, says that X has more structure than Y just in case X’s automorphisms form a proper subset of Y’s automorphisms. This approach is attractive, in part, because it seems to yield the right results in some comparisons of spacetime structure. But as I show, it yields the wrong results in a number of other cases. The problem is that the subset approach compares structure using (...) automorphism sets. So a different approach is needed: structure should be compared using automorphism groups. (shrink)

Non-Archimedean probability functions allow us to combine regularity with perfect additivity. We discuss the philosophical motivation for a particular choice of axioms for a non-Archimedean probability theory and answer some philosophical objections that have been raised against infinitesimal probabilities in general.

In his remarkable paper Formalism 64, Robinson defends his eponymous position concerning the foundations of mathematics, as follows:Any mention of infinite totalities is literally meaningless.We should act as if infinite totalities really existed. Being the originator of Nonstandard Analysis, it stands to reason that Robinson would have often been faced with the opposing position that ‘some infinite totalities are more meaningful than others’, the textbook example being that of infinitesimals. For instance, Bishop and Connes have made such claims regarding infinitesimals, (...) and Nonstandard Analysis in general, going as far as calling the latter respectively a debasement of meaning and virtual, while accepting as meaningful other infinite totalities and the associated mathematical framework. We shall study the critique of Nonstandard Analysis by Bishop and Connes, and observe that these authors equate ‘meaning’ and ‘computational content’, though their interpretations of said content vary. As we will see, Bishop and Connes claim that the presence of ideal objects in Nonstandard Analysis yields the absence of meaning. We will debunk the Bishop–Connes critique by establishing the contrary, namely that the presence of ideal objects in Nonstandard Analysis yields the ubiquitous presence of computational content. In particular, infinitesimals provide an elegant shorthand for expressing computational content. To this end, we introduce a direct translation between a large class of theorems of Nonstandard Analysis and theorems rich in computational content, similar to the ‘reversals’ from the foundational program Reverse Mathematics. The latter also plays an important role in gauging the scope of this translation. (shrink)

We give positive answers to two open questions from [15]. (1) For every set C countably determined over A, if C is Π 0 α (Σ 0 α ) then it must be Π 0 α (Σ 0 α ) over A, and (2) every Borel subset of the product of two internal sets X and Y all of whose vertical sections are Π 0 α (Σ 0 α ) can be represented as an intersection (union) of Borel sets with (...) vertical sections of lower Borel rank. We in fact show that (2) is a consequence of the analogous result in the case when X is a measurable space and Y a complete separable metric space (Polish space) which was proved by A. Louveau and that (1) is equivalent to the property shared by the inverse standard part map in Polish spaces of preserving almost all levels of the Borel hierarchy. (shrink)

Elementary Recursive Nonstandard Analysis, in short ERNA, is a constructive system of nonstandard analysis with a PRA consistency proof, proposed around 1995 by Patrick Suppes and Richard Sommer. Recently, the author showed the consistency of ERNA with several transfer principles and proved results of nonstandard analysis in the resulting theories (see [12] and [13]). Here, we show that Weak König's lemma (WKL) and many of its equivalent formulations over RCA₀ from Reverse Mathematics (see [21] and [22]) can be 'pushed down' (...) into the weak theory ERNA, while preserving the equivalences, but at the price of replacing equality with equality 'up to infinitesimals'. It turns out that ERNA plays the role of RCA₀ and that transfer for universal formulas corresponds to WKL. (shrink)

We explore the better known paradoxes of Zeno including modern variants based on infinite processes, from the point of view of standard, classical analysis, from which there is still much to learn (especially concerning the paradox of division), and then from the viewpoints of non-standard and non-classical analysis (the logic of the latter being intuitionist).The standard, classical or Cantorian notion of the continuum, modeled on the real number line, is well known, as is the definition of motion as the time (...) derivative of distance (we are not concerned with position and motion in more than one dimension, since Zeno wasn't). The real number line consists of its points, the distance between distinct points being positive and finite. The standard, classical derivative relies on the classical notion of limit, which does not use infinitesimals. (shrink)

Let ( * X, * T) be the nonstandard extension of a Hausdorff space (X, T). After Wattenberg [6], the monad m(x) of a near-standard point x in * X is defined as m(x) = μ T (st(x)). Consider the relation $R_{\mathrm{ns}} = \{\langle x, y \rangle \mid x, y \in \mathrm{ns} (^\ast X) \text{and} y \in m(x)\}.$ Frank Wattenberg in [6] and [7] investigated the possibilities of extending the domain of R ns to the whole of * X. Wattenberg's (...) extensions of R ns were required to be equivalence relations, among other things. Because the nontrivial ways of constructing such extensions usually produce monadic relations, the said condition practically limits (to completely regular spaces) the class of spaces for which such extensions are possible. Since symmetry and transitivity are not, after all, characteristics of the kind of nearness that is obtained in a general topological space, it may be expected that if these two requirements are relaxed, then a monadic extension of R ns to * X should be possible in any topological space. A study of such extensions of R ns is the purpose of the present paper. We call a binary relation $W \subseteq ^\ast X \times ^\ast X$ an infinitesimal on * X if it is monadic and reflexive on * X. We prove, among other things, that the existence of an infinitesimal on * X that extends R ns is equivalent to the condition that the space (X, T) be regular. (shrink)

This paper outlines a framework that may provide a mathematically rigorous quantum field theory. The framework relies upon the methods of nonstandard analysis. A theory of nonstandard inner product spaces and operators on these spaces is first developed. This theory is then applied to construct nonstandard Fock spaces which extend the standard Fock spaces. Then a rigorous framework for the field operators of quantum field theory is presented. The results are illustrated for the case of Klein-Gordon fields.

The Loeb space construction in nonstandard analysis is applied to the theory of processes to reveal basic phenomena which cannot be treated using classical methods. An asymptotic interpretation of results established here shows that for a triangular array (or a sequence) of random variables, asymptotic uncorrelatedness or asymptotic pairwise independence is necessary and sufficient for the validity of appropriate versions of the law of large numbers. Our intrinsic characterization of almost sure pairwise independence leads to the equivalence of various multiplicative (...) properties of random variables. (shrink)

The purpose of this paper is to investigate some problems of using finite (or *finite) computational arguments and of the nonstandard notion of an infinitesimal. We will begin by looking at the canonical example illustrating the distinction between classical and constructive analysis, the Intermediate Value Theorem.

In this article we show how the universe of BST, bounded set theory can be enlarged by definable subclasses of sets so that Separation and Replacement are true in the enlargement for all formulas, including those in which the standardness predicate may occur. Thus BST is strong enough to incorporate external sets in the internal universe in a way sufficient to develop topics in nonstandard analysis inaccessible in the framework of a purely internal approach, such as Loeb measures.

Using nonstandard methods, we generalize the notion of an algebraic primitive element to that of an hyperalgebraic primitive element, and show that under mild restrictions, such elements can be found infinitesimally close to any given element of a topological field.

Let X be a set, and let $\hat{X} = \bigcup^\infty_{n = 0} X_n$ be the superstructure of X, where X 0 = X and X n + 1 = X n ∪ P(X n ) (P(X) is the power set of X) for n ∈ ω. The set X is called a flat set if and only if $X \neq \varnothing.\varnothing \not\in X.x \cap \hat X = \varnothing$ for each x ∈ X, and $x \cap \hat{y} = \varnothing$ for x.y (...) ∈ X such that x ≠ y, where $\hat{y} = \bigcup^\infty_{n = 0} y_n$ is the superstructure of y. In this article, it is shown that there exists a bijection of any nonempty set onto a flat set. Also, if W̃ is an ultrapower of X̂ (generated by any infinite set I and any nonprincipal ultrafilter on I), it is shown that W̃ is a nonstandard model of X: i.e., the Transfer Principle holds for X̂ and W̃, if X is a flat set. Indeed, it is obvious that W̃ is not a nonstandard model of X when X is an infinite ordinal number. The construction of flat sets only requires the ZF axioms of set theory. Therefore, the assumption that X is a set of individuals (i.e., $x \neq \varnothing$ and a ∈ x does not hold for x ∈ X and for any element a) is not needed for W̃ to be a nonstandard model of X. (shrink)

A nonstandard set theory ∗ZFC is proposed that axiomatizes the nonstandard embedding ∗. Besides the usual principles of nonstandard analysis, all axioms of ZFC except regularity are assumed. A strong form of saturation is also postulated. ∗ZFC is a conservative extension of ZFC.

We use sets of assignments, a.k.a. teams, and measures on them to define probabilities of first-order formulas in given data. We then axiomatise first-order properties of such probabilities and prove a completeness theorem for our axiomatisation. We use the Hardy–Weinberg Principle of biology and the Bell’s Inequalities of quantum physics as examples.

We prove that a Borel subset of the product of two internal setsX andY all of whoseY-sections are ∏ 1 0 (K)(∑ 1 0 (K)) sets is the intersection (union) of a countable sequence of Borel graphs with internalY-sections. As a consequence we prove some standard results about the domains of graphs in the product of two topological spaces all of whose horizontal section are compact (open) sets. A version of classical Vitali-Lusin theorem for those types of graphs is given (...) as well as a new proof (and an extension) of a classical result of Kunugui. (shrink)