The Gödel Incompleteness Theorem and Decidability over a Ring

  • Lenore Blum
  • Steve Smale


Here we give an exposition of Gödel’s result in an algebraic setting and also a formulation (and essentially an answer) to Penrose’s problem. The notions of computability and decidability over a ring R underly our point of view. Gödel’s Theorem follows from the Main Theorem: There is a definable undecidable set ovis Z. By way of contrast, Tarski’s Theorem asserts that every definable set over the reals or any real closed field R is decidable over R. We show a converse to this result: Any sufficiently infinite ordered field with this latter property is necessarily real closed.


Finite Extension Incompleteness Theorem Real Closed Field Computable Isomorphism Weak Conjecture 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Amitsur, S.A., “Algebras over Infinite Fields, ” Proc. AMS American Math. 7 (1956), 35–48.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blum, L., Shub, M., and S. Smale, “On a Theory of Computation and Complexity over the Real Numbers: NP-Completeless, Recursive Functions and Universal Machines, ” Bull. AMS 21 (1989), 1–46.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen, P., Set Theory and the Continuum Hypothesis, Benjamin, New York, 1960.Google Scholar
  4. Davis, M., Computability and Unsolvability, Dover, New York, 1982.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Douady, A. and J. Hubbard, “Etude Dynamique des Polynomes Complex, I, 84–20, 1984 and II, 85–40. 1985, Publ. Math. d’Orsay, Univ. de Paris-Sud, Dept. de Math. Orsay, France.Google Scholar
  6. Friedman, H., and R. Mansfield, “Algorithmic Procedures, ” preprint, Penn State, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. Gödel, K., “Uber formal Unentscheidbare Satze der Principia Mathematica und Verwandter Systeme, I, ” Monatsh. Math. Phys. 38 (1931), 173–198.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. MacIntyre, A., “On ω1-Categorical Fields, ” Fund. Math. 7 (1971), 1–25.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. MacIntyre, A., McKenna, K., and L. van den Dries, “Elimination of Quantifiers in Algebraic Structures, ” Adv. Math. 47, (1983), 74–87.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Michaux, C., “Ordered Rings over which Output Sets Are Recursively Enumerable Sets, ” preprint, Universite de Mons, Belgium, 1990.Google Scholar
  11. Penrose, R., The Emperor’s New Mind, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1989.Google Scholar
  12. Renegar, J., “On the Computational Complexity and Geometry of the First-Order Theory of the Reals, ” Part I, II, III, preprint, Cornell University, 1989.Google Scholar
  13. Robinson, J., “The Undecidability of Algebraic Rings and Fields, ” Proc. AMS 10 (1959), 950–957.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Robinson, J., “On the Decision Problem for Algebraic Rings, ” Studies in Mathematical Analysis and Related Topics, Gilberson et al., ed., University Press, Stanford, 1962, pp. 297–304.Google Scholar
  15. Robinson, J., “The Decision Problem for Fields, ” Symposium on the Theory of Models, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1965, pp. 299–311.Google Scholar
  16. Rosser, B., “Extensions of Some Theorems of Gödel and Church, ” J. Symb. Logic 1 (1936), 87–91.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Tarski, A., A Decision Method for Elementary Algebra and Geometry, University of California Press, San Francisco, 1951.zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lenore Blum
  • Steve Smale

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations