COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S

INCOMPLETENESS
THEOREMS
LECTURES BY B. KIM

Step 0: Preliminary Remarks

We dene re ursive and re ursively enumerable fun tions and relations, enumerate several of their properties, prove Godel's  -Fun tion Lemma, and demonstrate
its rst appli ations to oding te hniques.
Denition. For R  !n a relation, R : !n ! !, the hara teristi fun tion on
R, is given by
(
1 if :R(a),
R (a) =
0 if R(a).
Denition. A fun tion from !m to ! (m  0) is alled re ursive (or omputable) if it is obtained by nitely many appli ations of the following rules:
R1.  Iin : !n ! !, 1  i  n, dened by (x ; : : : ; xn ) 7! xi is re ursive;
 + : !  ! ! ! and
: !  ! ! ! are re ursive;
 < : !  ! ! ! is re ursive.
R2. (Composition) For re ursive fun tions G; H ; : : : ; Hk su h that Hi : !n ! !
and G : !k ! !, F : !n ! !, dened by
1

F (a) = G(H (a); : : : ; Hk (a)):

1

is re ursive.
R3. (Minimization) For G : !n ! ! re ursive, su h that for all a 2 !n there
exists some x 2 ! su h that G(a; x) = 0, F : !n ! !, dened by
+1

F (a) = x(G(a; x) = 0)
is re ursive. (Re all that xP (x) for a relation P is the minimal x 2 ! su h
that x 2 P obtains.)

Denition. R( !k ) is alled re ursive, or omputable (R is a re ursive relation) if R is a re ursive fun tion.

Proofs in this note are adaptation of those in [Sh into the dedu tion system des ribed in [E.
Many thanks to Peter Ahumada and Mi hael Brewer who wrote up this note.

LECTURES BY B. KIM

Properties of Re ursive Fun tions and Relations:

P1. For Q  !k a re ursive relation, and H ; : : : ; Hk : !n ! ! re ursive fun tions,
P = fa 2 !n j Q(H (a); : : : ; Hk (a))g
is a re ursive relation.
Proof. P (a) = Q (H (a); : : : ; Hk (a)) is a re ursive fun tion by R2.
P2. For P  !n , a re ursive relation su h that for all a 2 !n there exists
some x 2 ! su h that P (a; x), then F : !n ! !, dened by
F (a) = xP (a; x)
is re ursive.
Proof. F (a) = x(P (a; x) = 0), so we may apply R3.
P3. Constant fun tions, Cn;k : !n ! ! su h that Cn;k (a) = k, are re ursive.
Proof. By indu tion:
Cn; (a) = x(Inn (a; x) = 0)
Cn;k (a) = x(Cn;k (a) < x)
are re ursive by R3 and P2, respe tively.
P4. For Q; P  !n , re ursive relations, :P , P _ Q, and P ^ Q are re ursive.
Proof. We have that
:P (a) = < (0; P (a));
P _ Q (a) = P (a)
Q (a);
P ^ Q = :(:P _ :Q):
1

+1

+1

+1

+1

P5. The predi ates =, , >, and  are re ursive.

Proof. For a; b 2 ! ,
a = b i :(a < b) ^ :(b < a);
a  b i :(a < b);
a > b i (a  b) ^ :(a = b); and
a  b i :(a > b);
hen e these are re ursive by P4.
Notation. We write, for a 2 !n , f : !n ! ! a fun tion and P  !m a relation,
x<f (a) P (x; b)  x(P (x; b) _ x = f (a)):
In parti ular, x<f (a) P (x; b) is the smallest integer less than f (a) whi h satises
P , if su h exists, or f (a), otherwise.
We also write
9x<f (a) P (x)  (x<f (a) P (x)) < f (a); and
8x<f (a) P (x)  :(9x<f (a) (:P (x))):
+1


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

The rst is learly satised if some x < f (a) satises P (x), while the se ond is
satisifed if all x < f (a) satisfy P (x).
P6. For P

 !n

+1

a re ursive relation, F : !n

+1

! !, dened by

F (a; b) = x<a P (x; b);

is re ursive.
Proof. F (a; b) = x(P (x; b) _ x = a), and thus F is re ursive by P2, sin e

for all b, a satises P (x; b)

_ x = a.

P7. For R  !n a re ursive relation, P; Q  !n

+1

P (a; b)  9x<a R(x; b)

Q(a; b)  8x<a R(x; b)

su h that

are re ursive.
Proof. Note that P is dened by omposition of re ursive fun tions and
predi ates, hen e re ursive by P1, and Q is dened by omposition of re ursive fun tions, re ursive predi ates, and negation, hen e re ursive by P1
and P4.

P8. _ : !  ! ! !, dened by

a_b=

a b if a  b,
0
otherwise,

is re ursive.
Proof. Note that

a _ b = x(b + x = a _ a < b):

P9. If G ; : : : ; Gk : !n ! ! are re ursive fun tions, and R ; : : : ; Rk  !n are

re ursive relations partitioning !n (i.e., for ea h a 2 !n, there exists a
unique i su h that Ri (a)), then F : !n ! !, dened by
8
G (a) if R (a),
>
>
>
>
<G (a) if R (a),
F (a) = ..
..
>
>
.
.
>
>
:G (a) if G (a),
1

is re ursive.
Proof. Note that

F = G :R1 +


+ Gk :Rk :
1

LECTURES BY B. KIM

P10. If Q ; : : : ; Qk  !n are re ursive relations, and R ; : : : ; Rk  !n are re ursive relations partitioning !n , then P  !n , dened by
8
>
>
<Q (a) if R (a),
..
P (a) i ...
.
>
>
:Q (a) if R (a),
k
k
is re ursive.
Proof. Note that
8
>
>
<Q1 (a) if R (a),
..
P (a) = ...
.
>
>
: (a) if R (a),
k
Qk
is re ursive by P9.
Denition. A relation P  !n is re ursively enumerable (r.e.) if there exists
some re ursive relation Q  !n su h that
P (a) i 9xQ(a; x):
Remark If a relation R  !n is re ursive, then it is re ursively enumerable, sin e
R(a) i 9x(R(a) ^ x = x).
Negation Theorem. A relation R  !n is re ursive if and only if R and :R are
1

+1

re ursively enumerable.

Proof. If R is re ursive, then :R is re ursive. Hen e by above remark, both are r.e.

Now, let P and Q be re ursive relations su h that for a 2 !n , R(a) i 9xQ(a; x)

and :R(a) i 9xP (a; x).
Dene F : !n ! ! by
F (a) = x(Q(a; x) _ P (a; x));
re ursive by P2, sin e either R(a) or :R(a) must hold.
We show that
R(a) i Q(a; F (a)):
In parti ular, Q(a; F (a)) implies there exists x (namely, F (a)) su h that Q(a; x),
thus R(a) holds. Further, if :Q(a; F (a)), then P (a; F (a)), sin e F (a) satises
Q(a; x) _ P (a; x). Thus :R(a) holds.

The -Fun tion Lemma.

-Fun tion Lemma (Godel). There is a re ursive fun tion  : ! ! ! su h that
 (a; i)  a _ 1 for all a; i 2 !, and for any a ; a ; : : : ; an 2 !, there is an a 2 !
su h that  (a; i) = ai for all i < n.
Remark 1. Let A = fa ; :::an g  ! r f0; 1g (n  2) be a set su h that any two
distin t elements of A are realtively prime. Then given non-empty subset B of A,
there is y 2 ! su h that for any a 2 A, ajy i a 2 B . (y is a produ t of elements in
B .)
Lemma 2. If kjz for z =
6 0, then (1 + (j + k)z; 1 + jz ) are relatively prime for any
j 2 !.
2


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

Proof. Note that for p prime, pjz implies that p=j 1 + jz . But if pj1 + (j + k )z and
pj1 + jz , then pjkz , implying pjkjz or pjz , and thus pjz , a ontradi tion.

Lemma 3. J : !

! !, dened by J (a; b) = (a + b)

Proof. If a + b < a0 + b0 , then

+ (a + 1), is one-to-one.

J (a; b) = (a + b) + a +1  (a + b) +2(a + b)+1 = (a + b +1)

Thus if J (a; b) = J (a0 ; b0 ), then a + b = a0 + b0 , and
0 = J (a0 ; b0 ) J (a; b) = a0 a;
implying that a = a0 and b = b0 , as desired.
2

 (a0 + b0 ) < J (a0 ; b0 ):

2

Proof of  -Fun tion Lemma. Dene

 (a; i) = x<a _ 1 (9y <a (9z <a (a = J (y; z ) ^ Div(1 + (J (x; i) + 1)
z; y))));
where Div(x; y)  9z < y + 1 (y = z
x) (satised i xjy) is re ursive. It is lear
that  is re ursive, and that  (a; i)  a _ 1.
Given a ; : : : ; an 2 !, we want to nd a 2 ! su h that  (a; i) = ai for all
i < n. Let
= max
fJ (ai ; i) + 1g;
i<n
1

and hoose z 2 !, nonzero, su h that for all j < nonzero, j jz .

By Lemma 2, for all j; l su h that 1  j < l  , (1 + jz; 1 + lz ) are relatively
prime, sin e 0 < l j < implies that (l j )jz . By Remark 1, there exists y 2 !
su h that for all j < ,
1 + (j + 1)z j y i j = J (ai ; i) for some i < n:
()
Let a = J (y; z ).
We note the following, for ea h ai :
(i) ai < y < a and z < a.
In parti ular, y; z < a by the denition of J , and that ai < y by ().
(ii) Div(1 + (J (ai ; i) + 1)
z; y).
From ().
(iii) For all x < ai , 1 + (J (x; i) + 1)z=j y.
Sin e J is one-to-one, x < ai implies J (x; i) 6= J (ai ; i), and for j 6= i,
J (x; i) 6= J (aj ; j ). Thus, by (), x does not satisfy the required predi ate
for y and z as hosen above.
Sin e for any other y0 and z 0, a = J (y; z ) 6= J (y0 ; z 0), we have that ai is in fa t
the minimal integer satisfying the predi ate dening  , and thus  (a; i) = ai , as
desired.
The  -fun tion will be the basis for various systems of oding. Our rst use will
be in en oding sequen es of numbers:

Denition. The sequen e number of a sequen e of natural numbers a ; : : : ; an ,

is given by
<a ; : : : an >= x( (x; 0) = n ^  (x; 1) = a ^


^  (x; n) = an ):
1

LECTURES BY B. KIM

Note that the map <> is dened on all sequen es due to the properties of 
proved above. Further, sin e  is re ursive, <> is re ursive, and <> is one-to-one,
sin e
<a ; : : : ; an >= <b ; : : : ; bm >
implies that n = m and ai = bi for ea h i. Note, too, that the sequen e number of
the empty sequen e is
<>= x( (x; 0) = 0) = 0:
An important feature of our oding is that we an re over a given sequen e from
its sequen e number:
Denition. For ea h i 2 !, we have a fun tion ()i : ! ! !, given by
(a)i =  (a; i):
Clearly ()i is re ursive for ea h i. () will be alled the length and denoted lh.
As intended, it follows from these denitions that ( < a : : : an >)i = ai and
lh( <a : : : an >) = n.
Note also that whenever a > 0; we have lh(a) < a and (a)i < a.
Denition. The relation Seq  ! is given by
Seq(a) i 8x < a(lh(x) 6= lh(a) _ 9i < lh(a)((x)i 6= (a)i ):
That Seq is re ursive is evident from properties enumerated above. From our
denition, it is lear that Seq(a) if and only if a is the sequen e number for some
sequen e (in parti ular, a = < (a) ; : : : ; (a)lh a >). Note that
:Seq(a) i 9x < a(lh(x) = lh(a) ^ 8i < lh(a)((x)i = (a)i ):
Denition. The initial sequen e fun tion Init : ! ! ! is given by
Init(a; i) = x(lh(x) = i ^ 8j < i((x)j = (a)j ):
Again, Init is evidently re ursive. Note that for 1  i  n,
Init( <a ; : : : ; an >) = <a ; : : : ; ai >;
as intended.
Denition. The on atenation fun tion  : ! ! ! is given by
1

+1

+1

( )

+1

+1

+1

+1

a  b = x(lh(x) = lh(a) + lh(b)

^ 8i < lh(a)((x)i = (a)i ) ^ 8j < lh(b)((x)lh a j = (b)j ):
Note that  is re ursive, and that
<a : : : an >  <b : : : bm >= <a : : : an ; b : : : bm >;
as desired.
Denition. For F : !  !k ! !, we dene F : !  !k ! ! by
F (a; b) = <F (0; b); : : : ; F (a 1; b) >;
or, equivalently,
x(lh(x) = a ^ 8i < a((x)i = F (i; b))):
Note that F (a; b) = (F (a + 1; b))a , thus we have that F is re ursive if and
only if F is re ursive. Be ause F (a;  ) is dened in terms of values F (x;  ), for x
stri tly smaller than a, this onstru tion will enable us to dene F indu tively.
+1

+1

( )+ +1

+1

+1

+1


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

Properties of Re ursive Fun tions and Relations ( ontinued):

P11. For G : !  !  !n ! ! a re ursive fun tion, the fun tion F : !  !n ! !,
given by
F (a; b) = G(F (a; b); a; b);
is re ursive.
Proof. Note that

F (a; b) = G(H (a; b); a; b)

where

H (a; b) = x(Seq(x) ^ lh(x) = a ^ 8i < a((x)i

+1

= G(Init(x; i); i; a)):

A ording to this denition, F (0; b) = G( <>; 0; b) = G(0; 0; b),

F (1; b) = G( <G(0; 0; b) >; 1; b);

and

F (2; b) = G( <G(0; 0; b); G( <G(0; 0; b) >; 1; b) >; 2; b);

showing that omputation is umbersome, but possible, for any parti ular value a.
P12. For G : !  !n ! ! and H : !  !n ! !, F : !  !n ! !, dened by
(

F (a; b) =

F (G(a; b); b) if G(a; b) < a, and

otherwise,
H (a; b)

is re ursive.
Proof. Note that when G(a; b) < a, we have

F (G(a; b); b) = (F (a; b))G a;b

(

)+1

whi h is re ursive by P11.

For most purposes, when we dene a fun tion F indu tively by ases, we must
satisfy two requirements to guarantee that our fun tion is well-dened. First, if
F (x; b) appears in a dening ase involving a, we must show that x < a whenever
this ase is true. Se ond, we must show that our base ase is not dened in terms
of F . In parti ular, this means that we annot use F in a dening ase whi h is
used to ompute F (0;  ).
P13. Given re ursive G : !n ! ! and H : !  !n ! !, F : !  !n ! !, given
by
(
H (F (a 1; b); a 1; b) if a > 0, and
F (a; b) =
otherwise,
G(b)
is re ursive.
2

Proof. Note that F has the form of P12.

LECTURES BY B. KIM

P14. Given re ursive relations Q  !n and R  !n and re ursive H :

!  !n ! ! su h that H (a; b) < a whenever Q(a; b) holds, the relation
P  !n , given by
(
P (H (a; b); b) if Q(a; b),
P (a; b) i
otherwise,
R(a; b)
is re ursive.
Proof. Dene H 0 : !  ! n ! ! by
(
H (a; b) if Q(a; b), and
H 0 (a; b) =
a
otherwise.
H 0 is learly re ursive. Note
(
 (H 0 (a; b); b) if H 0 (a; b) < a, and
P (a; b) = P
otherwise.
R (a; b)
+1

+1

+1

The following example will prove useful:

Denition. Let A  ! be given by
A(a; ) i Seq( ) ^ lh( ) = a ^ 8i < a(( )i = 0 _ ( )i = 1);
and let F : ! ! ! be given by
8
>
if i = 0,
<x(A(a; x))
F (a; i) = x(F (a; i 1) < x ^ A(a; x) if 0 < i < 2a , and
>
:0
otherwise.
Then the fun tion bd : ! ! ! is given by
bd(n) = F (n; 2n 1):
Evidently, A, F , and bd are all re ursive. In fa t,
bd(n) = maxf< ::: n > j = 0 or 1g:
2

+1

+1

Step 1: Representability of Re ursive Fun tions in Q

We dene Q, a subtheory of the natural numbers, and prove the Representability
Theorem, stating that all re ursive fun tions are representable in this subtheory.
Consider the language of natural numbers LN = fN; +;
; S; <; 0g. We spe ify
the theory Q with the following axioms.
Q1. 8x Sx 6= 0.
Q2. 8x8y Sx = Sy ! x = y.
Q3. 8x x + 0 = x.
Q4. 8x8y x + Sy = S (x + y).
Q5. 8x x
0 = 0.
Q6. 8x8y x
Sy = x
y + x.
Q7. 8x :(x < 0).
Q8. 8x8y x < Sy ! x < y _ x = y.
Q9. 8x8y x < y _ x = y _ y < x.


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

Note that the natural numbers, N, are a model of the theory Q. If we add to
this theory the set of all generalizations of formulas of the form
('x ^ 8x(' ! 'xSx )) ! ';
providing the apability for indu tion, we all this theory Peano Arithmeti , or PA.
Thus Q  PA, and PA ` Q.
Notation. We dene, for a natural number n,
n  SS
: : : S} 0:
| {z
0

Denition. A fun tion f : !n ! ! is representable in Q if there exists an

LN -formula '(x ; : : : ; xn ; y) su h that
Q ` 8y('(k ; : : : ; kn ; y) ! y = f (k ; : : : ; kn ))
for all k ; : : : ; kn 2 !. We say ' represents f in Q.
Denition. A relation P  !n is representable in Q if there exists an LN -formula
'(x ; : : : ; xn ) su h that for all k ; : : : ; kn 2 !,
P (k ; : : : ; kn ) ! Q ` '(k ; : : : ; kn )
and
:P (k ; : : : ; kn ) ! Q ` :'(k ; : : : ; kn ):
Again, we say that ' represents P in Q.
To prove the Representability Theorem, we will require the following:
Lemma 1. If m = n, then Q ` m = n, and if m 6= n, then Q ` :(m = n).
Proof. It is enough to demonstrate this for m > n. For n = 0, our result follows
from axiom Q1. Assume, then, that the result holds for k = n and all l > k. Then
we have that, for a given m > n + 1, Q ` m 1 6= n. By axiom Q2 we have,
Q ` m 1 6= n ! m 6= n + 1. Hen e we on lude that Q ` m 6= n + 1, and the
result holds for k = n + 1, as required.
Lemma 2. Q ` m + n = m + n:
Proof. For n = 0, our result follows from axiom Q3. Assume, then, that the result
holds for k = n. We must show it holds for k = n + 1 as well. But Q ` m + n =
m + n, and we obtain Q ` m + n + 1 = m + n + 1 by Q4.
Lemma 3. Q ` m
n = m
n
Proof. For n = 0, our result follows from axiom Q5. Assume, then, that the
result holds for k = n. Then Q ` m
n = mn. Applying Q6, we have that
Q ` m
n + 1 = mn + m, and applying the previous lemma, we have the result for
k = n + 1, as required.
Lemma 4. If m < n, then Q ` m < n. Further, if m  n, we have Q ` :(m < n).
Proof. For n = 0, the result follows from Q7. Assume, then, that the results hold
for k = n. We show both laims hold for k = n + 1 as well.
First, suppose m < n + 1. Either m < n, and Q ` m < n by the indu tion
hypothesis, or m = n, and Q ` m = n by Lemma 1. In either ase, by Q8, we have
that Q ` m < n + 1.
1

10

LECTURES BY B. KIM

Se ond, suppose m  n + 1. Then m > n and by the indu tion hypothesis,

Q ` :(m < n). By Lemma 1, we also have Q ` :(m = n). Applying Q8 and Rule
T, we have Q ` m > n. Again applying Rule T, we have that Q ` :(m < n + 1);
as desired.

Lemma 5. For any relation P

representable.

 !n , P

is representable in Q if and only if P is

Proof. Assume P is representable and that '(x1 : : : xn ) represents P . Let

(x; y)  ('(x) ^ y = 0) _ (:'(x) ^ y = 1):

Then (x; y) represents P .
In parti ular, suppose P (k ; : : : ; kn ) holds. Then Q ` '(k ; : : : ; kn ). But by our
denition of and Rule T,
Q ` '(k ; : : : ; kn ) ! (y = 0 ! (k ; : : : ; kn ; y));
and thus Q ` y = 0 ! (k ; : : : ; kn ; y), as required. Similarly, if :P (k ; : : : ; kn )
holds, then Q ` :'(k ; : : : ; kn ), and sin e
Q ` :'(k ; : : : ; kn ) ! (y = 1 ! : (k ; : : : ; kn ; y);
we have that Q ` y = 1 ! : (k ; : : : ; kn ; y), as required. Thus, (x; y) represents
P .
Assume now that (x; y) represents P . Then (x; 0) represents P .
In parti ular, when P (k ; : : : ; kn ) holds, we have
Q ` (k ; : : : ; kn ; y) ! y = 0:
Substitution of y by 0 yields Q ` (k ; : : : ; kn ; 0); as desired. Similarly, when
:P (k ; : : : ; kn ) holds, we have
Q ` (k : : : kn ; y) ! y = 1;
and be ause Q ` :(0 = 1) we may on lude Q ` : (k : : : kn ; 0), as needed. Thus
is P representable.
1

Lemma 6. For a formula ' in LN ,

Q ` 'x !


! ('xk
0

! (x < k ! '))

Proof. The proof is by indu tion on k . When k is 0, we have

Q ` (x < 0 ! '):
This is (va uously) true by axiom Q7. Now, assume that
Q ` 'x ! : : : ! ('xk ! (x < k ! ')):
We must show that
Q ` 'x !


! ('xk ! (x < k + 1 ! ')):
Equivalently, we want to show that ` ' where = Q [ f'x ; :::; 'xk ; x < k + 1g.
By Q8, ` x < k _ x = k. In the rst ase, the indu tive hypothesis implies that
` ', while in the latter ase, j= x = k ! ('xk ! '), and hen e ` '. By either
route, proves '.
0


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

11

Lemma 7. If (a) Q ` :'xk for k < n, and (b) Q ` 'xn , then for z 6= x not appearing
in ',
Q ` (' ^ 8z (z < x ! :'xz )) ! x = n:
Proof. We dene

Now, we obtain

 (' ^ 8z (z < x ! :'xz )):

j= x = n ! (

By (a) and Lemma 6, we get

! ('xn ^ 8z (z < n ! :'xz ))):

Q ` x < n ! :';

()
()

and, applying substitution and generalization, we obtain

Q ` 8z (z < n ! :'xz ):

Combining this with (b) and (), we on lude

Q`x=n! :
For the reverse impli ation, we note that
j= 8z (z < x ! :'xz ) ! (n < x ! :'xn );

and thus (b) implies Q ` ! :(n < x). Now Q [f ; x < ng ` ' ^ :' by () and
the denition of . Therefore Q ` ! :(x < n) and by Axiom Q9 we on lude
Q ` ! x = n.

Representability Theorem. Every re ursive fun tion or relation is representable

in Q.
Proof. It su es to prove representability of fun tions having the forms enumerated

in the denition of re ursiveness:

R1. Iin , +,
, and < .
The latter three are representable by Lemmas 2, 3, and 4. In parti ular,
for +, say, we have that '(x ; x ; y)  y = x + x represents + in Q, sin e
for any m; n 2 !,
1

Q ` m + n = m + n;
Q ` y = m + n ! y = m + n;
Q ` '(m; n; y) ! y = m + n; and hen e
Q ` 8y('(m; n; y) ! y = m + n);

as required.
and < are similar (with < making additional use of Lemma
5).
Iin is representable by '(x ; : : : ; xn ; y)  xi = y. In parti ular, for any
k ; : : : ; kn 2 !, Iin (k ; : : : ; kn ) = ki , and hen e
1

Q ` '(k ; : : : ; kn ; y)
1

! y = ki ! y = Iin (k ; : : : ; kn );
1

by our hoi e of '. Generalization ompletes the result.

12

LECTURES BY B. KIM

R2. F (a) = G(H (a); : : : ; Hk (a)), where G and ea h of the Hi are representable.
Assume that G is represented in Q by ' and the Hi are represented in
Q by i , respe tively. We show that F is represented by
(x; y)  9z ; : : : ; zk ( (x; z ) ^


^ k (x; zk ) ^ '(z ; : : : ; zk ; y)):
In other word we want to show, for any a ; :::; an 2 !,
(y)
Q ` (a ; : : : ; an ; y) ! y = G(H (a); : : : ; Hk (a))
where a = (a :::an ).
Now, for = Q [ f(a ; : : : ; an ; y)g, sin e the i represent Hi , we have
that ` 9z ; : : : ; zk (z = H (a) ^


^ zk = Hk (a) ^ '(z ; : : : ; zk ; y)):
Hen e we have
j= 9z ; : : : ; zk ('(H (a); : : : ; Hk (a); y));
and sin e the zi do not appear,
j= '(H (a); : : : ; Hk (a); y):
Sin e ' represents G, we have
j= y = G(H (a); : : : ; Hk (a));
as required.
On the other hand, for  = Q [ fy = G(H (a); : : : ; Hk (a))g,
 ` '(H (a); : : : ; Hk (a); y)
 ` 9z ; : : : ; zk (z = H (a) ^


zk = Hk (a) ^ '(z ; : : : ; zk ; y))
 ` 9z ; : : : ; zk ( (a; zi ) ^


k (a; zk ) ^ '(z ; : : : ; zk ; y))
 ` (a ; : : : ; an ; y)
Thus (y) is established.
R3. F (a) = x(G(a; x) = 0), where G is representable in Q and for all a there
exists x su h that G(a; x) = 0, is representable in Q.
Assume G is represented in Q by '(x ; : : : ; xn ; x; y). Let
(x ; : : : ; xn ; x)  'y ^ 8z (z < x ! :'yxz ):
Let F (a) = b and ki = G(a; i) for i 2 !. Then
Q ` '(a ; : : : ; an ; i; y) ! y = ki ;
thus
Q ` '(a ; : : : ; an ; i; 0) ! 0 = ki ;
and if j < b, so that kj 6= 0, then
Q ` :'(a ; : : : ; an ; j; 0):
On the other hand, kb = 0, so
Q ` '(a ; : : : ; an ; b; 0):
Hen e, by Lemma 7,
Q ` ('(a; x; y)y ^ 8z (z < x ! :'(a; x; y)y xz )) ! x = b;
and thus,
Q ` (a; x) ! x = b:
By generalization, we have that represents F in Q, as desired.
1


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

13

Step 2: Axiomatizable Complete Theories are De idable

We begin by showing that we may en ode terms and formulas of a reasonable
language in su h a way that important lasses of formulas, e.g., the logi al axioms,
are mapped to re ursive subsets of the natural numbers. We use this to derive the
main result.
Denition. Let L be a ountable language with subsets C, F, and P of onstant,
fun tion, and predi ate symbols, respe tively (= 2 P). Let V be a set of variables
for L. L is alled reasonable if the following two fun tions exist:
 h : L [f:; !; 8g[ V ! ! inje tive su h that V = h(V), C = h(C), F = h(F),
and P = h(P) are all re ursive.
 AR : ! ! ! r f0g re ursive su h that AR(h(f )) = n and AR(h(P )) = n
for n-ary fun tion and predi ate symbols f and P .
For the rest of this note, the language L is ountable and reasonable.
Now we dene a oding de : fL-terms and L-formulasg ! ! indu tively, by
 For x 2 V [ C, dxe = <h(x) >.
 For u ; : : : ; un 2 V [ C and f 2 F,
dfu u : : : une = <h(f ); du e; du e; : : : ; dune > :
 For L-terms t ; : : : ; tn and P 2 P,
dP t t : : : tn e = <h(P ); dt e; : : : ; dtn e > :
 For L-formulas ' and ,
d' ! e = <h(!); d'e; d e >;
d:'e = <h(:); d'e >;
d8x'e = <h(8); dxe; d'e > :
Note that our denition of de is one-to-one. Given a term or formula , we all
de the Godel number of .
We show the following predi ates and fun tions are re ursive (We follow denitions for syntax in [E.):
(1) Vble = fdve j v 2 Vg  ! and Const = fd e j 2 Cg  !.
Proof. Note
Vble(x) i x = < (x) > ^ V((x) );
Const(x) i x = < (x) > ^ C((x) ):
1

1 2

(2) Term = fdte j t an L-termg  !.

Proof. Note
8
>
<8j < (lh(a) _ 1) Term((a)j ) if Seq(a) ^ F((a) )
Term(a) i
^ AR((a) ) = lh(a) _ 1;
>
:Vble(a) _ Const(a)
otherwise.
1

+2

14

LECTURES BY B. KIM

(3) AtF = fde j  an atomi L-formulag  !.

Proof. Note
AtF(a) i Seq (a)

^ P((a) ) ^ (AR((a) ) = lh(a) 1)

^ 8j < (lh(a) 1) (Term((a)j )):
1

+2

(4) Form = fd'e j ' an L-formulag  !.

Proof. Note

8
Form((a) )
>
>
>
<Form((a) ) ^ Form((a) )
Form(a) i
>
Vble((a) ) ^ Form((a) )
>
>
:
AtF (a)
2

if a = <h(:); (a) >,

if a = <h(!); (a) ; (a) >,
if a = <h(8); (a) ; (a) >,
otherwise.
2

(5) Sub : ! ! !, su h that Sub(dte; dxe; due) = dtxu e and Sub(d'e; dxe; due) =
d'xu e for terms t and u, variable x, and formula '.
3

Proof. Dene

8

if Vble(a) ^ a = b,
>
>
>
>
>
< (a) ; Sub((a) ; b; ); : : :
if lh(a) > 1 ^ (a) 6= h(8)
>
>
>
<
: : : ; Sub((a)lh a ; b; ) >
^ Seq(a);
Sub(a; b; ) =
>
< (a) ; (a) ; Sub((a) ; b; ) > if a = <h(8); (a) ; (a) >,
>
>
>
>
>
^ (a) 6= b
>
>
:a
otherwise.
1

( )

Note that, if well-dened, the fun tion has the properties desired above.
We show Sub is well-dened by indu tion on a: a = 0 falls into the
rst or last ategory sin e lh(0) = 0, hen e Sub(0; b; ) is well-dened for
all b; 2 !. If a 6= 0, then (a)i < a for all i  lh(a), and thus we may
assume the values Sub((a)i ; b; ) are well-dened, showing Sub(a; b; ) to be
well-dened in all ases.
(6) Free  ! , su h that for formula ', term  , and variable x, Free(d'e; dxe)
if and only if x o urs free in ', and Free(d e; dxe) if and only if x o urs
in 
2

Proof. Dene

8
>
<9j < (lh(a) 1) (Free((a)j ; b)) if lh(a) > 1
Free(a; b) i Free((a) ; b) ^ (a) 6= b
if lh(a) > 1
>
:
a=b
otherwise.
+2

^ (a) =
6 h(8),
^ (a) = h(8),
1

Free learly has the desired property, and that it is well-dened follows by

essentially the same indu tion on a as above.

(7) Sent = fd'e j ' is an L-senten eg  !.


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

15

Proof. Note
Sent(a) i Form(a)

^ 8b<a (:Vble(b) _ :Free(a; b)):

(8) Subst(a; b; )  ! su h that for a given formula ', variable x, and term t,
Subst(d'e; dxe; dte) if and only if t is substitutable for x in '.
3

Proof. Dene

8
>
Subst((a) ; b; )
>
>
>
>
>
Subst
((a) ; b; ) ^ Subst((a) ; b; )
<
Subst(a; b; ) i :Free(a; b) _ (:Free( ; (a) )
>
>
>
^ Subst((a) ; b; ))
>
>
>
:0 = 0
2

if a = <h(:); (a) >,

if a = <h(!); (a) ; (a) >,
if a = <h(8); (a) ; (a) >,
2

otherwise.

Note that Subst has the desired property, and is well-dened by essentially
the same indu tion used above.
(9) We dene
8
:False((a) ; b) ^ False((a) ; b) if a = <h(!); (a) ; (a) >
>
>
>
<
^ Form((a) ) ^ Form((a) );
False(a; b) i
>
:
False
((
a
)
;
b
)
if
a
= <h(:); (a) > ^ Form((a) ),
>
>
:
Form(a) ^ (b)a = 0
otherwise.
2

False is re ursive by the same indu tion as applied above. We note the
signi an e of False presently.
To ea h b 2 !, we may asso iate a truth assignment vb su h that for a prime
formula (atomi or of the form 8x'),

vb ( ) = F i (b)d e = 0:
Further, for any truth assignment v : A ! fT; Fg, where A is a nite set of prime
formulas, there exists a b su h that v = vb : we may write A = f' ; : : : ; 'n g su h
that d' e < d' e <


< d'n e. For 1  j  d'n e dene j = 0 when j = d'i e
for some i  n and v('i ) = F , and j = 1 otherwise. Then b = < ; : : : ; d'n e >
satises vb = v on A.
Then moreover, for any formula ' built up from A,
1

v(') = F i vb (') = F i False(d'e; b):

(10) Taut  ! su h that for a formula , Taut(de) if and only if  is a tautology.

! ! su h that bd(a) = maxf < ; : : : ; a > j i 2

f0; 1gg, re ursive, has been previously dened. Dene
Taut(a) i Form(a) ^ 8b< (bd(a) + 1) (:False(a; b)):

Proof. Re all bd : !

(11) AG2 = fd'e j ' is in axiom group 2g  !.

16

LECTURES BY B. KIM

Proof. Re all axiom group 2 ontains formulas of the form 8x

term t substitutable for x in . Thus

AG2(a) i 9x; y; z <a (Vble(x)

x
t , with

^ Form(y) ^ Term(z ) ^ Sub(y; x; z )

^ a = <h(!); <h(8); x; y >; Subst(y; x; z ) >);

where 9x; y; z <a P (x; y; z ) abbreviates what one would expe t.

(12) AG3 = fd'e j ' is in axiom group 3g  !.

Proof. Re all we take axiom group 3 to be the formulas having the following

form: 8x(

0 ) ! (8x

! 8x

0 ). Thus

AG3(a) i 9x; y; z <a (Vble(x) ^ Form(y) ^ Form(z )

^ a = <h(!); <h(8); x; <h(!); y; z >>;
<h(!); <h(8); x; y >; <h(8); x; z >>>)
(13) AG4 = fd'e j ' is in axiom group 4g  !.
Proof. Re all axiom group 4 ontains formulas of the form
x does not o ur free in . Thus

AG4(a) i 9x; y <a (Vble(x)

! 8x

, where

^ Form(y)
^ :Free(y; x) ^ a = <h(!); y; <h(8); x; y >>)

(14) AG5 = fd'e j ' is in axiom group 5g  !.

Proof. Re all axiom group 5 ontains formulas of the form x = x, for a
variable x, hen e

AG5(a) i 9x<a (Vble(x)

^ a = <h(=); x; x>):

(15) AG6 = fd'e j ' is in axiom group 6g  !.

0 ),
by repla ing

Proof. Re all formulas of axiom group 6 have the form x = y ! (

where is an atomi formula and 0 is obtained by from

one or more o urren es of x with y. Thus

AG6(a) i 9x; y; b; <a (Vble(x) ^ Vble(y) ^ AtF(b) ^ AtF( )

^ lh(b) = lh( ) ^ 8j < lh(b) + 1(( )j = (b)j _ (( )j = y ^ (b)j = x))
^ a = <h(!); <h(=); x; y >; <h(!); b; >>)
(16) Gen(a; b)  ! , su h that Gen(d'e; d e) if and only if ' is a generalization
of (i.e., ' = 8x : : : 8xn for some nite fxi g  V).
2


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

Proof. Note that

8
>
<a = <h(8); (a) ; (a) >
Gen(a; b) i 0 = 0
>
:0 = 1
2

^ Vble((a) ) ^ Gen((a) ; b)
2

17

if a > b,
if a = b,
if a < b.

(17)  = fde j  2 g  !, where  is the set of logi al axioms.

Proof. Note that
(a) i 9b<a + 1 (Form(a) ^ Gen(a; b)
^ (Taut(b) _ AG2(b) _ AG3(b)

_ AG4(b) _ AG5(b) _ AG6(b)))

We have, to this point, dened three odings: <> on sequen es of natural numbers, h on the language and logi al symbols, and de on the terms and formulas. We
presently dene a fourth oding, of sequen es of formulas:
d e : fsequen es of L-formulasg ! !;
given by
d ' ; : : : ; 'n e = < d' e; : : : ; d'n e > :
This map is one-to-one, as it is derived from the established (inje tive) odings,
and in parti ular, we an determine, for a given number, if it lies in the image of
d e , and, if so, re over the asso iated sequen e of formulas.
Denition. Given L, let T be a theory (a olle tion of senten es) in L. Dene
T = fde j  2 T g:
We say that T is axiomatizable if there exists a theory S , axiomatizing T (that
is, su h that Cn S = Cn T ), su h that S is re ursive. We say that T is de idable
if Cn T is re ursive.
We shall make use of the following relations:
 DedT = fdd' ; : : : ; 'n e j ' ; : : : ; 'n is a dedu tion from T g  !.
Note that
1

DedT (a) i Seq(a) ^ lh(a) 6= 0

^ 8j < lh(a) (((a)j+1 ) _ T ((a)j+1 ) _ 9i; k <j +1 ((a)k+1 =<h(!); (a)i+1 ; (a)j+1 >))




PrfT  ! 2 , given by PrfT (a; b) i DedT (b) ^ a = (b)lh(b) .

PfT  ! , given by PfT (a) i Sent(a) ^ 9xPrfT (a; x).
Note that we may read PrfT (a; b) as \b is a proof of a from T ," and PfT (a) as

\a is a senten e provable from T ." In parti ular

PfT = Cn T = fd e j T `  g:
We use this fa t to prove the following:
Theorem. If T is axiomatizable, then PfT = Cn T is re ursively enumerable.
Proof. Let S axiomatize T , where S is re ursive. From the above denitions, we
see that DedS and PrfS are re ursive relations, hen e PfS is an r.e. relation. But
PfS = PfT , sin e Cn S = Cn T .

18

LECTURES BY B. KIM

Theorem. If T is axiomatizable and omplete in L, then T is de idable.

Proof. By the negation theorem, it su es to show that :PfT is re ursively enumerable. Note that sin e T is omplete, for any senten e , T 0  if and only if
T ` :. Hen e

:PfT (a) i :Sent(a) _ 9mPrfT ( <h(:); a>; m)

i 9m(:Sent(a) _ PrfT ( <h(:); a>; m)):

Thus :PfT is re ursively enumerable, and PfT is re ursive.

We an see that if we say T is axiomatizable in wider sense when S axiomatizing T is re ursively enumerable, then the above two theorems still hold with this
seemingly weaker notion. In fa t, two notions are equivalent, whi h is known as
Craig's Theorem.

Step 3: The In ompleteness Theorems and Other Results

We return now to the language of natural numbers, LN . Re all that we dene,
for a natural number n,
: : : S} 0:
n  SS
| {z
n

Denition. The diagonalization of an LN formula ' is a new formula

d(')  9v (v = d'e ^ ');
0

where 9 and

provide the usual abbreviations in LN .

In parti ular, we note d(') is satisable pre isely when ' is satisable by some
truth assignment taking v to the Godel number of ', and LN j= d(') pre isely
when ' is satised by every truth assignment taking v to d'e.
0

Lemma. There exists a re ursive fun tion dg : !

formula, dg(d'e) = dd(')e.

!!

su h that for any LN

Proof. Dene num : ! ! ! by num(0) = < 0 > and, for n 2 !

num(n + 1) = <h(S ); num(n) > :

In parti ular, note that num(n) = dne.

Dene

dg(a) = <h(:); <h(8); dv0 e; <h(:);

<h(:); <h(!); <h(=); dv e; num(a) >; <h(:); a>>>>>>

0

Then

dg(d'e) = <h(:); <h(8); dv0 e; <h(:);

<h(:); <h(!); <h(=); dv e; num(d'e) >; <h(:); d'e >>>>>>;

= <h(:); <h(8); dv e; <h(:);
<h(:); <h(!); <h(=); dv e; dd'ee >; <h(:); d'e >>>>>> :
0


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

19

However, writing out what formula this en odes and introdu ing our usual abbreviations, we have
dg(d'e) = d:8v :(:(v = d'e ! :'))e
= d9v (v = d'e ^ ')e
= dd(')e;
as desired.
0

Fixed Point Theorem (Godel). For any LN -formula '(x) (i.e., either a senten e
or a formula having x as the only free variable), there is some LN -senten e  su h
that

Q`

! '(de):

Proof. Sin e dg is re ursive, it is representable in Q by Step 1, say by (x; y ). Then

Q ` 8y( (n; y) ! y = dg(n)):

Let (v )  9y( (v ; y) ^ '(y)), and let n = d(v )e. Dene

  d((v ))  9v (v = n ^ (v )):
Then if we let k = dg(n) = de, we have
j=  ! (n) ! 9y( (n; y) ^ '(y)):
But
Q ` (n; y) ! y = k;
and therefore
Q `  ! 9y(y = k ^ '(y)) ! '(k) ! '(de);
as required.
0

Tarski Undenability Theorem. Th N = fde j N j= g is not denable.

Proof. Suppose Th N were denable by  (x). Then by the xed point lemma, with
' = : , there exists a senten e  su h that
N j=  ! : (d e):
Then N j=  implies that N 6j=  (de), implying N 6j= , or N j= :, sin e Th N
is omplete. On the other hand, N 6j=  implies N j= :, and thus that N j=
 (de), implying N j= . The ontradi tions together imply that  annot represent
Th N.
Strong Unde idability of Q. Let T be a theory in L  LN . If T [ Q is onsistent
in L, then T is not de idable in L (Cn T is not re ursive).
Proof. Assume that Cn T is re ursive. We rst show that this implies re ursiveness
of Cn T [ Q. Sin e Q is nite, it su es to show that for any senten e  in the
language, Cn T [ f g is re ursive.
In parti ular, note that if  2 Cn T [ f g, then  !  2 Cn T . Thus
a 2 Cn T [ f g i Sent(a) ^ <h(!); d e; a>2 Cn T :
Hen e Cn T [ f g is re ursive, as desired.

20

LECTURES BY B. KIM

To prove the theorem, then, it su es to show that Cn T [ Q is not re ursive. If

this were the ase, then it would be representable, say by  (x), in Q. By the xed
point lemma, there exists an LN senten e  su h that
Q `  ! : (de):
If T [ Q ` , then
Q `  (de);
by the representability of Cn T [ Q by  (x) in Q. In parti ular,
Q ` :;
a ontradi tion. On the other hand, if T [ Q 0 , then by representability,
Q ` : (de);
and hen e
Q ` ;
a ontradi tion, implying that Cn T [ Q is not representable, and hen e not re ursive.
Corollary. Th N, PA, and Q are all unde idable.
Proof. We need note only that ea h of these theories is onsistent with Q.
Moreover, we have:
Unde idability of First Order Logi (Chur h). For a reasonable ountable
language L  LN , the set of all Godel numbers of valid senten es (fd e j ; `  g)
is not re ursive (the set of valid senten es is not de idable).

In fa t, the above orollary is true for any ountable L ontaining a k-ary predi ate or fun tion symbol, k  2, or at least two unary fun tion symbols.
Godel-Rosser First In ompleteness Theorem. If T is a theory in a ountable
reasonable L  LN , with T [ Q onsistent and T axiomatizable, then T is not

omplete.

Proof. By Step 2, if T is omplete, then T is de idable, ontradi ting the strong

unde idability of Q.
Remarks. In (N; +), 0, <, and S are denable. Hen e the same result follows if we
take L0N = f+;
g instead of our usual LN . In parti ular, Th(N; +;
) is unde idable,
and for any T 0  Q0 (where Q0 is simply Q written in the language of L0N ), we have
that T 0 is, if onsistent, unde idable, and, if axiomatizable, in omplete.
It is important to note that for an unde idable theory T , we may have T  T 0,
where T 0 is a de idable theory. As an example, the theory of groups is unde idable,
whereas the theory of divisible torsion-free groups is de idable.
We turn our attention now to the proof of the result used in Godel's original
paper. In parti ular, Godel worked in the model (N; +;
; 0; <; E ). (Note that E ,
exponentiation, is denable in (N; +;
; 0; <), or, equivalently, (N; +;
)).
Let T  Q be a onsistent theory in a reasonable ountable language L  LN ,
and presume that T is re ursive. Then

`  ) Q ` PfT (de):


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

21

In parti ular, T `  implies that PrfT (de; m) for some m 2 !. Sin e PrfT is
re ursive, it is representable in Q, hen e Q ` PrfT (de; m), and
Q ` 9xPrfT (de; x);
or
Q ` PfT (de):
By the xed point lemma, there exists a senten e  su h that
T  Q `  ! :PfT (de):
()
If T ` , then Q ` PfT (de), and thus Q ` :, and hen e T ` :, a ontradi tion.
Thus T 0 .
On the other hand, if T is !- onsistent (i.e., whenever T ` 9x'(x), then for
some n 2 !, T 0 :'(n)), then T 0 :. In parti ular, if T ` :, then
T ` PfT (de);
by (). That is,
T ` 9xPrfT (de; x):
However, if PrfT (de; m) for some m 2 !, then T ` , ontradi ting the onsisten y of T . Thus we must have :PrfT (de; m) for all m 2 !. Sin e Q represents
PrfT ,
T  Q ` :PrfT (de; m)
for all m 2 !, ontradi ting the !- onsisten y of T .
Rosser generalized Godel's proof by singling out for T a senten e  su h that
T 0  and T 0 :, without the assumption of !- onsisten y.
We now begin our approa h to Godel's Se ond In ompleteness Theorem. We x
T , a theory in a ountable reasonable language L  LN .
We note the following fa t from Hilbert and Bernays' Grundlagen der Mathematik, 1934.
Fa t. If T is onsistent, T ` P A, and T is re ursive, then for any senten es  and
in L,
I. T `  ) Q ` PfT (de)
II. PA ` (PfT (de) ^ PfT (d ! e)) ! PfT (de)
III. PA ` PfT (de) ! PfT

dPfT (de)e
 :PfT (d0 6= 0e). Clearly ConT

Notation. We will write ConT

if T is onsistent.
Lemma. If T `  ! , then PA ` PfT (de) ! PfT (de).
Proof. If T

and by (II),

`  ! , then by (I) above,

PA ` PfT (d ! e);

PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT (d e):

holds if and only

22

LECTURES BY B. KIM

Godel's Se ond In ompleteness Theorem. If T is onsistent, T is re ursive,

and T ` PA, then T 0 ConT .
Proof. By the xed point lemma, there exists  su h that
(y)
Q `  ! :PfT (de):
By (III), above,
PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT

And further, by Lemma, we have


PA ` PfT

(z)

dPfT (de)e :

dPfT (de)e ! PfT (d:e):

Combining this result with (z), we have

PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT (d: e):
Now note that ` : ! ( ! (0 6= 0)). By the lemma,
PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT (d ! (0 6= 0)e):
In parti ular,
PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT (d e) ^ PfT (d ! (0 6= 0)e);
hen e, by (II),
PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT (d0 6= 0e);
i.e.
PA ` PfT (d e) ! :ConT :
Thus PA ` ConT ! , by (y).
Now, suppose that T ` ConT . Then T ` , and hen e by (I), T  Q ` PfT (de).
But again, by (y), this implies that T ` :, a ontradi tion, showing that T annot
prove its own onsisten y.
We remark that one may arry the proof through using only the assumption that
T is re ursively enumerable.
Lob's Theorem. Suppose T is a onsistent theory in L  LN , su h that T re ursive, and T ` PA. Then for any L-senten e  , if T ` PfT (d e) !  , then
T ` .
Proof. By the xed point lemma, there exists su h that
Q ` ! (PfT (de) ! ):
Sin e T ` PA  Q, T proves the same result. From this we may dedu e that
PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT (d e):
In parti ular, by our lemma, we have


PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT dPfT (d e) !  e ;
and, ombining this with (III) from above,


PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT dPfT (d e)e
and thus, by (II),

^ PfT dPfT (de) ! e ;

PA ` PfT (d e) ! PfT (d e);


COMPLETE PROOFS OF GODEL'S
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS

23

as desired.
Now assume that T

` PfT (de) ! . Then, by the above,

T ` PfT (de) ! :
By our hoi e of , this in turn implies that T ` . By (I), we have that Q `
PfT (d e), and hen e T proves the same result, implying that T `  , as desired.

Remark. Godel's Se ond In ompleteness Theorem in fa t follows from Lob's Theorem. In parti ular, given T as in the hypotheses of both theorems, if T ` ConT ,
then
T ` PfT (d0 6= 0e) ! 0 6= 0:
But by Lob's Theorem, this in turn implies that T ` 0 6= 0, showing that su h a
theory, if onsistent, annot prove its own onsisten y.

Referen es
[BJ G. S. Boolos and R. C. Jerey, Computability and logi .
[E H. Enderton, A mathemati al introdu tion to logi .
[Sh J. R. Shoeneld, Mathemati al logi .
[Sm R. M. Smullyan, Godel's in ompleteness theorems.