T × W tense-modal logic: the modal algebra of satisfaction #
The satisfaction clauses of T × W logic, its dual operators, and the hierarchy box ⊃ N ⊃ A.
Historical necessity N is necessity along historical equivalence and box necessity along
the universal relation, so both are S5 by modal correspondence: historical equivalence is a
setoid, whose relation is reflexive, symmetric and transitive.
Main results #
sat_neg,sat_and,sat_G,sat_H,sat_N,sat_box: the satisfaction clauses.sat_M: historical possibility is∃over historical alternatives.sat_box_imp_N,sat_N_imp_self,sat_box_imp_self: the hierarchybox ⊃ N ⊃ A.sat_N_imp_N_N,sat_M_imp_N_M,sat_box_imp_box_box,sat_dia_imp_box_dia:Nandboxare S5.Fut_adjoint_H,Pst_adjoint_G: the tense adjunctions.
References #
Historical equivalence as accessibility #
Satisfaction clauses #
Dual operators #
The modality hierarchy box ⊃ N ⊃ A and S5, from modal correspondence #
N and box are necessities along relations, so the hierarchy and the S5 axioms come from
modal correspondence: box ⊃ N from box_restrict, since the universal relation contains
historical equivalence; the T axioms from reflexivity (box_T); the 4 axioms from
transitivity (box_four); the 5 axioms from the symmetry and transitivity of historical
equivalence.
Historical necessity N is an indicial modality in the sense of [Gal75], necessity
along historical equivalence.
The temporal adjunctions Fut ⊣ H, Pst ⊣ G #
The tense operators are Galois-adjoint on each model's entailment preorder ([Bur84]): Fut
(future ∃) is left adjoint to H (past ∀), and Pst (past ∃) to G (future ∀).