The representation of mathematical objects in terms of (more) basic ones is part and parcel of (the foundations of) mathematics. In the usual foundations of mathematics, namely, ZFC set theory, all mathematical objects are represented by sets, while ordinary, namely, non–set theoretic, mathematics is represented in the more parsimonious language of second-order arithmetic. This paper deals with the latter representation for the rather basic case of continuous functions on the reals and Baire space. We show that the logical strength of (...) basic theorems named after Tietze, Heine, and Weierstrass changes significantly upon the replacement of “second-order representations” by “third-order functions.” We discuss the implications and connections to the reverse mathematics program and its foundational claims regarding predicativist mathematics and Hilbert’s program for the foundations of mathematics. Finally, we identify the problem caused by representations of continuous functions and formulate a criterion to avoid problematic codings within the bigger picture of representations. (shrink)

Reverse Mathematics (RM) is a program in the foundations of mathematics where the aim is to find the minimal axioms needed to prove a given theorem of ordinary mathematics. Generally, the minimal axioms are equivalent to the theorem at hand, assuming a weak logical system called the base theory. Moreover, many theorems are either provable in the base theory or equivalent to one of four logical systems, together called the Big Five. For instance, the Weierstrass approximation theorem, i.e., that a (...) continuous function can be approximated uniformly by a sequence of polynomials, has been classified in RM as being equivalent to weak König’s lemma, the second Big Five system. In this paper, we study approximation theorems for discontinuous functions via Bernstein polynomials from the literature. We obtain many equivalences between the latter and weak König’s lemma. We also show that slight variations of these approximation theorems fall far outside of the Big Five but fit in the recently developed RM of new ‘big’ systems, namely the uncountability of ${\mathbb R}$, the enumeration principle for countable sets, the pigeon-hole principle for measure, and the Baire category theorem. (shrink)

The uncountability of $\mathbb {R}$ is one of its most basic properties, known far outside of mathematics. Cantor’s 1874 proof of the uncountability of $\mathbb {R}$ even appears in the very first paper on set theory, i.e., a historical milestone. In this paper, we study the uncountability of ${\mathbb R}$ in Kohlenbach’s higher-order Reverse Mathematics (RM for short), in the guise of the following principle: $$\begin{align*}\mathit{for \ a \ countable \ set } \ A\subset \mathbb{R}, \mathit{\ there \ exists } (...) \ y\in \mathbb{R}\setminus A. \end{align*}$$ An important conceptual observation is that the usual definition of countable set—based on injections or bijections to ${\mathbb N}$ —does not seem suitable for the RM-study of mainstream mathematics; we also propose a suitable (equivalent over strong systems) alternative definition of countable set, namely union over ${\mathbb N}$ of finite sets; the latter is known from the literature and closer to how countable sets occur ‘in the wild’. We identify a considerable number of theorems that are equivalent to the centred theorem based on our alternative definition. Perhaps surprisingly, our equivalent theorems involve most basic properties of the Riemann integral, regulated or bounded variation functions, Blumberg’s theorem, and Volterra’s early work circa 1881. Our equivalences are also robust, promoting the uncountability of ${\mathbb R}$ to the status of ‘big’ system in RM. (shrink)

Reverse mathematics is a program in the foundations of mathematics founded by Friedman and developed extensively by Simpson and others. The aim of RM is to find the minimal axioms needed to prove a theorem of ordinary, that is, non-set-theoretic, mathematics. As suggested by the title, this paper deals with the study of the topological notions of dimension and paracompactness, inside Kohlenbach’s higher-order RM. As to splittings, there are some examples in RM of theorems A, B, C such that A (...) ↔, that is, A can be split into two independent parts B and C, and the aforementioned topological notions give rise to a number of splittings involving highly natural A, B, C. Nonetheless, the higher-order picture is markedly different from the second-one: in terms of comprehension axioms, the proof in higher-order RM of, for example, the paracompactness of the unit interval requires full second-order arithmetic, while the second-order/countable version of paracompactness of the unit interval is provable in the base theory RCA 0. We obtain similarly “exceptional” results for the Urysohn identity, the Lindelöf lemma, and partitions of unity. We show that our results exhibit a certain robustness, in that they do not depend on the exact definition of cover, even in the absence of the axiom of choice. (shrink)