The Nature of Scientific Proof in the Age of Simulations. Is numerical mimicry a third way of establishing truth?

Is numerical mimicry a third way of establishing truth? Kevin Heng received his M.S. and Ph.D. in astrophysics from the Joint Institute for Laboratory Astrophysics (JILA) and the University of Colorado at Boulder. He joined the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton from 2007 to 2010, first as a Member and later as the Frank & Peggy Taplin Member. From 2010 to 2012 he was a Zwicky Prize Fellow at ETH Z¨urich (the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology). In 2013, he joined the Center for Space and Habitability (CSH) at the University of Bern, Switzerland, as a tenure-track assistant professor, where he leads the Exoplanets and Exoclimes Group. He has worked on, and maintains, a broad range of interests in astrophysics: shocks, extrasolar asteroid belts, planet formation, fluid dynamics, brown dwarfs and exoplanets. He coordinates the Exoclimes Simulation Platform (ESP), an open-source set of theoretical tools designed for studying the basic physics and chemistry of exoplanetary atmospheres and climates (www.exoclime.org). He is involved in the CHEOPS (Characterizing Exoplanet Satellite) space telescope, a mission approved by the European Space Agency (ESA) and led by Switzerland. He spends a fair amount of time humbly learning the lessons gleaned from studying the Earth and Solar System planets, as related to him by atmospheric, climate and planetary scientists. He received a Sigma Xi Grant-in-Aid of Research in 2006

A feasible theory of truth over combinatory algebra

We define an applicative theory of truth TPT which proves totality exactly for the polynomial time computable functions. TPT has natural and simple axioms since nearly all its truth axioms are standard for truth theories over an applicative framework. The only exception is the axiom dealing with the word predicate. The truth predicate can only reflect elementhood in the words for terms that have smaller length than a given word. This makes it possible to achieve the very low proof-theoretic strength. Truth induction can be allowed without any constraints. For these reasons the system TPT has the high expressive power one expects from truth theories. It allows embeddings of feasible systems of explicit mathematics and bounded arithmetic. The proof that the theory TPT is feasible is not easy. It is not possible to apply a standard realisation approach. For this reason we develop a new realisation approach whose realisation functions work on directed acyclic graphs. In this way, we can express and manipulate realisation information more efficiently.

Unfolding Feasible Arithmetic and Weak Truth

In this paper we continue Feferman’s unfolding program initiated in (Feferman, vol. 6 of Lecture Notes in Logic, 1996) which uses the concept of the unfolding U(S) of a schematic system S in order to describe those operations, predicates and principles concerning them, which are implicit in the acceptance of S. The program has been carried through for a schematic system of non-finitist arithmetic NFA in Feferman and Strahm (Ann Pure Appl Log, 104(1–3):75–96, 2000) and for a system FA (with and without Bar rule) in Feferman and Strahm (Rev Symb Log, 3(4):665–689, 2010). The present contribution elucidates the concept of unfolding for a basic schematic system FEA of feasible arithmetic. Apart from the operational unfolding U0(FEA) of FEA, we study two full unfolding notions, namely the predicate unfolding U(FEA) and a more general truth unfolding UT(FEA) of FEA, the latter making use of a truth predicate added to the language of the operational unfolding. The main results obtained are that the provably convergent functions on binary words for all three unfolding systems are precisely those being computable in polynomial time. The upper bound computations make essential use of a specific theory of truth TPT over combinatory logic, which has recently been introduced in Eberhard and Strahm (Bull Symb Log, 18(3):474–475, 2012) and Eberhard (A feasible theory of truth over combinatory logic, 2014) and whose involved proof-theoretic analysis is due to Eberhard (A feasible theory of truth over combinatory logic, 2014). The results of this paper were first announced in (Eberhard and Strahm, Bull Symb Log 18(3):474–475, 2012).

Standard cystectomy fits all: truth or myth?

Radical cystectomy (RC) with pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) followed by urinary diversion is the treatment of choice for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (BC) and non-invasive BC refractory to transurethral resection of the bladder (TUR-B) and/or intravesical instillation therapies. Since the morbidity and possible mortality of this surgery are relevant, care must be taken in the preoperative selection of patients for the various organ-sparing procedures (e.g., bladder-sparing, nerve sparing, seminal vesicle sparing) and various types of urinary diversion. The patient’s performance status and comorbidities, along with individual tumor characteristics, determine possible surgical steps during RC. This individualized approach to RC in each patient can maximize oncological safety and minimize avoidable side effects, rendering ‘standard’ cystectomy a surgery of the past.