Results 1 
6 of
6
The recursively enumerable degrees
 in Handbook of Computability Theory, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics 140
, 1996
"... ..."
Double Jump Inversions and Strong Minimal Covers in the Turing Degrees
, 2004
"... Decidability problems for (fragments of) the theory of the structure D of Turing degrees, form a wide and interesting class, much of which is yet unsolved. Lachlan showed in 1968 that the first order theory of D with the Turing reducibility relation is undecidable. Later results concerned the decida ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Decidability problems for (fragments of) the theory of the structure D of Turing degrees, form a wide and interesting class, much of which is yet unsolved. Lachlan showed in 1968 that the first order theory of D with the Turing reducibility relation is undecidable. Later results concerned the decidability (or undecidability) of fragments of this theory, and of other theories obtained by extending the language (e.g. with 0 or with the Turing jump operator). Proofs of these results often hinge on the ability to embed certain classes of structures (lattices, jumphierarchies, etc.) in certain ways, into the structure of Turing degrees. The first part of the dissertation presents two results which concern embeddings onto initial segments of D with known double jumps, in other words a double jump inversion of certain degree structures onto initial segments. These results may prove to be useful tools in uncovering decidability results for (fragments of) the theory of the Turing degrees in languages containing the double jump operator. The second part of the dissertation relates to the problem of characterizing the Turing degrees which have a strong minimal cover, an issue first raised by Spector in 1956. Ishmukhametov solved the problem for the recursively enumerable degrees, by showing that those which have a strong minimal cover are exactly the r.e. weakly recursive degrees. Here we show that this characterization fails outside the r.e. degrees, and also construct a minimal degree below 0 ′ which is not weakly recursive, thereby answering a question from Ishmukhametov’s paper.
Conjectures and Questions from Gerald Sacks’s Degrees of Unsolvability
 Archive for Mathematical Logic
, 1993
"... We describe the important role that the conjectures and questions posed at the end of the two editions of Gerald Sacks's Degrees of Unsolvability have had in the development of recursion theory over the past thirty years. Gerald Sacks has had a major influence on the development of logic, particular ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We describe the important role that the conjectures and questions posed at the end of the two editions of Gerald Sacks's Degrees of Unsolvability have had in the development of recursion theory over the past thirty years. Gerald Sacks has had a major influence on the development of logic, particularly recursion theory, over the past thirty years through his research, writing and teaching. Here, I would like to concentrate on just one instance of that influence that I feel has been of special significance to the study of the degrees of unsolvability in general and on my own work in particular the conjectures and questions posed at the end of the two editions of Sacks's first book, the classic monograph Degrees of Unsolvability (Annals
Global Properties of the Turing Degrees and the Turing Jump
"... We present a summary of the lectures delivered to the Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Singapore, during the 2005 Summer School in Mathematical Logic. The lectures covered topics on the global structure of the Turing degrees D, the countability of its automorphism group, and the definability of ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a summary of the lectures delivered to the Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Singapore, during the 2005 Summer School in Mathematical Logic. The lectures covered topics on the global structure of the Turing degrees D, the countability of its automorphism group, and the definability of the Turing jump within D.
Turing Incomparability in Scott Sets
 Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society
"... Abstract. For every Scott set F and every nonrecursive set X in F, there is a Y ∈ F such that X and Y are Turing incomparable. 1. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. For every Scott set F and every nonrecursive set X in F, there is a Y ∈ F such that X and Y are Turing incomparable. 1.
The ∀∃theory of R(≤, ∨, ∧) is undecidable
 Trans. Amer. Math. Soc
, 2004
"... Abstract. The three quantifier theory of (R, ≤T), the recursively enumerable degrees under Turing reducibility, was proven undecidable by Lempp, Nies and Slaman (1998). The two quantifier theory includes the lattice embedding problem and its decidability is a longstanding open question. A negative ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. The three quantifier theory of (R, ≤T), the recursively enumerable degrees under Turing reducibility, was proven undecidable by Lempp, Nies and Slaman (1998). The two quantifier theory includes the lattice embedding problem and its decidability is a longstanding open question. A negative solution to this problem seems out of reach of the standard methods of interpretation of theories because the language is relational. We prove the undecidability of a fragment of the theory of R that lies between the two and three quantifier theories with ≤T but includes function symbols. Theorem. The two quantifier theory of (R, ≤, ∨, ∧), the r.e. degrees with Turing reducibility, supremum and infimum (taken to be any total function extending the infimum relation on R) is undecidable. The same result holds for various lattices of ideals of R which are natural extensions of R preserving join and infimum when it exits. 1.