Non-examples and examples Almost by definition, a theory that accepts
excluded middle while having independent statements does not have the disjunction property. So all classical theories expressing
Robinson arithmetic do not have it. Most classical theories, such as
Peano arithmetic and
ZFC in turn do not validate the existence property either, e.g. because they validate the
least number principle existence claim. But some classical theories, such as ZFC plus the
axiom of constructibility, do have a weaker form of the existence property (Rathjen 2005).
Heyting arithmetic is well known for having the disjunction property and the (numerical) existence property. While the earliest results were for constructive theories of arithmetic, many results are also known for constructive set theories (Rathjen 2005).
John Myhill (1973) showed that
IZF with the
axiom of collection eliminated in favor of the axiom of replacement has the disjunction property, the numerical existence property, and the existence property. Michael Rathjen (2005) proved that
CZF has the disjunction property and the numerical existence property.
Freyd and Scedrov (1990) observed that the disjunction property holds in free
Heyting algebras and free
topoi. In
categorical terms, in the
free topos, that corresponds to the fact that the
terminal object, \mathbf{1}, is not the join of two proper subobjects. Together with the existence property it translates to the assertion that \mathbf{1} is an indecomposable
projective object—the
functor it represents (the global-section functor) preserves
epimorphisms and
coproducts.
Relationship between properties There are several relationship between the five properties discussed above. In the setting of arithmetic, the numerical existence property implies the disjunction property. The proof uses the fact that a disjunction can be rewritten as an existential formula quantifying over natural numbers: : A \vee B \equiv (\exists n) [ (n=0 \to A) \wedge (n \neq 0 \to B)]. Therefore, if : A \vee B is a theorem of T , so is \exists n\colon (n=0 \to A) \wedge (n \neq 0 \to B) . Thus, assuming the numerical existence property, there exists some s such that : (\bar{s}=0 \to A) \wedge (\bar{s} \neq 0 \to B) is a theorem. Since \bar{s} is a numeral, one may concretely check the value of s: if s=0 then A is a theorem and if s \neq 0 then B is a theorem.
Harvey Friedman (1974) proved that in any
recursively enumerable extension of
intuitionistic arithmetic, the disjunction property implies the numerical existence property. The proof uses self-referential sentences in way similar to the proof of
Gödel's incompleteness theorems. The key step is to find a bound on the existential quantifier in a formula (∃
x)A(
x), producing a
bounded existential formula (∃
x<
n)A(
x). The bounded formula may then be written as a finite disjunction A(1)∨A(2)∨...∨A(n). Finally,
disjunction elimination may be used to show that one of the disjuncts is provable. == History ==