Axioms used in Afred Tarski's and Steven Givant's Tarski's System of Geometry (1991).
Link: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.27.9012
(This is basically a summary of the first part of Tarski's and Givant's paper.)
Alfred Tarski proved around 1930 that his system of geometry is complete, decidable and that there is a constructive concistency proof for the theory.
History
Through out the years, the set of Tarski's axioms have changed. At first, there were 20 (1-4, 5$_1$, 6, 7$_2$, 8$^{(2)}$, 9$_1^{(2)}$, 10, 12-21), as well as all instances of axiom schema 11. This made it an axiom system for elementary 2-dimensional geometry.
It turned out that axiom 13 and 19 was derivable from the remaining axioms, and they where omitted. Axiom 20 was replaced by a more precise variant, 20$_1$.
In 1956-57 a substantial simplification of the axiom set was obtained by the efforts of Eva Kallin, Scott Taylor and Tarski. The axioms 5$_1$, 7$_2$, 9$_1^{(2)}$ and 10 was respectively replaced by 5, 7$_1$, 9$^{(2)}$ and 10$_1$. In the modified axiom set, the axioms 12, 14, 16, 17, 20$_1$ and 21 are shown to be derivable from the remaining ones. Then we have only the twelve axioms 1-6, 7$_1$, 8$^{(2)}$, 9$^{(2)}$, 10$_1$, 15 and 18, and all instances of the axiom schema 11.
In Tarski's course on the foundations of geometry at the University of California (1956-57), he pointed out that by replacing the axiom schema (11) with the second-order sentence 11 for the full (non-elementary) 2-dimensional Euclidean geometry. It was also pointed out that the axioms 8$^{(2)}$, 9$_1^{(2)}$ could be changed in order to obtain an axiom set for $n$-dimensional geometry.
Gupta then showed that axioms 6 and 18 can be derived from the remaining axioms. So what people now usually mean when they talk about Tarski's axioms of geometry, is the axioms 1-5, 7$_1$, 8$^{(n)}$, 9$^{(n)}$ ($n=2,3,...$), 10$_1$, 15 and 11 (either the first-order axiom schema or the second-order single sentence). These are the ones marked with *.
Definitions
- The ternary relation $B(abc)$
expresses that betweenness holds
between $a,b$ and $c$, which
intuitively means that $b$ lies on
the line segment joining $a$ and $d$.
- The quarternary relation $ab \equiv
cd$ expresses that the relation of
equidistance (or congruence of
segments) holds among the points
$a,b,c,d$, which intuitively means
that the distance from $a$ to $b$ is
the same as the distance from $c$ to
$d$.
The only primitive geometrical object in Tarski's axiom system, are points. All variables $a,b,c,...$ are assumed to range over points.
*Axiom 1 Reflexivity Axiom for Equidistance.
$$ab\equiv ba$$
The distance between the points $a$ and $b$ is the same as the distance between $b$ and $a$.
*Axiom 2 Transitivity Axiom for Equidistance.
$$ab \equiv pq \land ab \equiv rs \to pq \equiv rs$$
If the distance between the points $a$ and $b$ is the same as the distance between $p$ and $q$ and also the same as the distance between $r$ and $s$, then the distance between $p$ and $q$ is the same as the distance between $r$ and $s$.
*Axiom 3 Identity Axiom for Equidistance.
$$ab\equiv cc\to a = b$$
If the distance between $a$ and $b$ is the same as the distance between $c$ and $c$, then $a$ and $b$ are the same point.
*Axiom 4 Axiom of Segment Construction.
$$\exists x (B(qax)\land ax \equiv bc)$$
There is a point $x$ such that $a$ lies between $q$ and $x$ and the distance between $a$ and $x$ is equal to the distance between $b$ and $c$.
Intuitively this means that, given any line segment $bc$, it is possible to construct a line segment congruent to it (of equal length), starting on any point $a$ and going in the direction of ray that is determined by $a$ and the endpoint $q$ on the ray.
*Axiom 5 Five-Segment Axiom.
$$[a \neq b \land B(abc)\land B(a'b'c')\land ab \equiv a'b'\land bc \equiv b'c' \land ad \equiv a'd' \land bd \equiv b'd']\to cd \equiv c'd'$$
If
- $a$ and $b$ is not the same point and
- $b$ lies between $a$ and $c$ and
- $b'$ lies between $a'$ and $c'$ and
- the distance between $a$ and $b$ is the same as the distance between $a'$ and $b'$ and
- the distance between $b$ and $c$ is the same as the distance between $b'$ and $c'$ and
- the distance between $a$ and $d$ is the same as the distance between $a'$ and $d'$ and
- the distance between $b$ and $d$ is the same as the distance between $b'$ and $d'$,
then the distance between $c$ and $d$ is the same as the distance between $c'$ and $d'$.
"The Five-Segment Axiom asserts (in the non-degenerate case) that, given two triangles $\triangle acd$ and $\triangle a'c'd'$, and given interior points $b$ and $b'$ of the sides $ac$ and $a'c'$, from the congruences of certain corresponding pairs of line segments, one can conclude the congruence of another pair of corresponding line segments. Thus, this axiom is similar in character to the well-known theorems of Euclidean geometry that allow one to conclude, from hypotheses about the congruence of certain corresponding sides and angles in two triangles, the congruence of other corresponding sides and angles."
(There is another variant of this axiom at page 179 in the paper i linked to.)
Axiom 6 Identity Axiom for Betweenness.
$$B(aba) \to a = b$$
Axiom 7 First (or Inner) form of the Pasch Axiom.
$$B(apc) \land B(bqc) \to \exists x [B(pxb)\land B(qxa)]$$
*Axiom 7$_1$ Second (or Outer) form of Pasch Axiom.
$$B(apc) \land B(qcb) \to \exists x [B(axq)\land B(bpx)]$$
If $p$ lies between $a$ and $c$, and $c$ lies between $q$ and $b$, then there is an $x$ such that $x$ lies between $a$ and $q$ and $p$ lies between $b$ and $x$.
"In the outer form of the Pasch Axiom [...] the point $b$ lies on the extension of the side $cq$ in the direction from $q$ to $c$, and the line is assumed to intersect the “inner” side of the triangle (from the perspective of $bp$). The conclusion is that it must intersect the side $aq$ in some point $x$ on the extension of the side $bp$; this is expressed by the assertion $B(bpx)$. In other words, it intersects the "outer" side of the triangle."
(Page 180 contains another variant of this axiom.)
Axiom 7$_3$ Weak Pasch Axiom.
$$B(atd) \land B(bdc) \to \exists x \, \exists y [B(axb) \land B(ayc)\land B(ytx)]$$
Axiom 8$^{(1)}$ Lower 1-Dimensional Axiom.
$$\exists a \,\exists b \, (a \neq b)$$
Axiom 8$^{(2)}$ Lower 2-Dimensional Axiom.
$$\exists a\, \exists b\, \exists c\, [\neg B(abc) \land \neg B(bca) \land \neg B(cab)]$$
"The Lower 2-Dimensional Axiom asserts that there exist three non-collin-
ear points."
*Axiom 8$^{(n)}$ Lower $n$-Dimensional Axiom for $n = 3, 4, ...$.
$\exists a \, \exists b \, \exists c \, \exists p_1 \, \exists p_2 \,\cdots \, \exists p_{n-1} \,$ $$\left[ \bigwedge_{1\leq i < j < n} p_i \neq p_j \land \bigwedge_{i=2}^{n-1} a p_1 \equiv a p_i \land \bigwedge_{i=2}^{n-1} b p_1 \equiv b p_i \land \bigwedge_{i=2}^{n-1} c p_1 \equiv c p_i \land [\neg B(abc)\land \neg B(bca) \land \neg B(cab)]\right]$$
"The Lower $n$-Dimensional Axiom for $n = 3, 4, . . .$ asserts that there exist
$n − 1$ distinct points $p_1 , p_2 , . . . , p_{n−1}$ and three points $a, b, c$ such that each of the three points is equidistant from each of the $n-1$ points, but the three points are not collinear."
Axiom 9$^{(0)}$ Upper 0-Dimensional Axiom.
$$a=b$$
Axiom 9$^{(1)}$ Upper 1-Dimensional Axiom.
$$B(abc) \lor B(bca) \lor B(cab)$$
Axiom 9$_1^{(2)}$ Upper 2-Dimensional Axiom.
$\exists y \,$ {$([B(xya) \lor B(yax) \lor B(axy)] \land B(byc))$
$([B(xyb) \lor B(ybx) \lor B(bxy)] \land B(cya))$
$([B(xyc) \lor B(ycx) \lor B(cxy)] \land B(ayb))$}
(Page 183 contains another variant of this axiom.)
*Axiom 9$^{(n)}$ Upper $n$-Dimensional Axiom (for $n=2,3,...$).
$$\left[ \bigwedge_{1\leq i < j \leq n} p_i \neq p_j \land \bigwedge_{i=2}^{n} a p_1 \equiv a p_i \land \bigwedge_{i=2}^{n} b p_1 \equiv b p_i \land \bigwedge_{i=2}^{n} c p_1 \equiv c p_i\right]\to [B(abc)\lor B(bca) \lor B(cab)]$$
"The Upper $n$-Dimensional Axiom for $n = 2, 3, . . .$ asserts that any three
points $a$, $b$, $c$ which are equidistant from each of $n$ distinct points $p_1, p_2, ..., p_n$ must be collinear."
*Axiom 10$_1$ First Form of Euclid’s Axiom.
$B(adt) \land B(bdc) \land a \neq d \to \exists x \, \exists y \, [B(abx) \land B(acy) \land B(ytx)]$$
"The First Form of Euclid’s Axiom says that through any point $t$ in the
interior of an angle $\triangle bac$ there is a line—here, the line $xy$—that intersects both sides of the angle—here, in the points $x$ and $y$."
(Page 183 contains another variant of this axiom.)
Axiom 10$_2$ Second Form of Euclid’s Axiom.
$$B(abc) \lor B(bca) \lor B(cab) \lor \exists x \, [ax \equiv bx\land ax \equiv cx]$$
Axiom 10$_3$ Third Form of Euclid’s Axiom.
$$[B(abf) \land ab \equiv bf \land B(ade) \land ad\equiv de \land B(bdc) \land bd \equiv dc] \to bc \equiv fe$$
*Axiom 11 Axiom of Continuity.
$$\exists a\, \forall x \, \forall y [x\in X \land y \in Y \to B(axy)] \to \exists b\, \forall x \, \forall y [x\in X \land y \in Y \to B(xby)]$$
"The Axiom of Continuity asserts: any two sets $X$ and $Y$ such that the
elements of $X$ precede the elements of $Y$ with respect to some point $a$ (that
is, $B(axy)$ whenever $x$ is in $X$ and $y$ is in $Y$ ) are separated by a point $b$."
*Axiom Schema 11(alternative to axiom 11.) Axiom Schema of Continuity.
$$\exists a\, \forall x \, \forall y [\alpha \land \beta \to B(axy)] \to \exists b\, \forall x \, \forall y [\alpha \land \beta \to B(xby)]$$
where $\alpha, \beta$ are first-order formulas, the first of which does not contain any free occurrences of $a, b, y$ and the second any free occurrences of $a, b, x$.
We can use the Axiom Schema in stead of axiom 11 to keep the axioms within the framework of first-order logic.
Axiom 12 Reflexivity Axiom for Betweenness.
$$B(abb)$$
Axiom 13
$$a=b \to B(aba)$$
Axiom 14 Symmetry Axiom for Betweenness.
$$B(abc) \to B(cba)$$
*Axiom 15 Inner Transitivity Axiom for Betweenness.
$$B(abd) \land B(bcd) \to B(abc)$$
Axiom 16 Outer Transitivity Axiom for Betweenness.
$$B(abc) \land B(bcd) \land b \neq c \to B(abd)$$
Axiom 17 Inner Connectivity Axiom for Betweenness.
$$B(abd) \land B(acd) \to [B(abc) \lor B(acb)]$$
Axiom 18 Outer Connectivity Axiom for Betweenness.
$$B(abc) \land B(abd) \land a \neq b \to [B(acd) \lor B(adc)]$$
Axiom 19
$$a=b \to ac \equiv bc$$
Axiom 20 Uniqueness Axiom for Triangle Construction.
$$[ac\equiv ac'\land bc \equiv bc'\land B(adb) \land B(ad'b)\land B(cdx)\land B(c'd'x) \land d \neq x\land d' \neq x] \to c=c'$$
(Page 187 contains another variant of this axiom.)
Axiom 21 Existence Axiom for Triangle Construction.
$$ab \equiv a'b' \to \exists c \, \exists x \, (ac\equiv a'c' \land bc \equiv b'c' \land B(cxp) \land [B(abx) \lor B(bxa) \lor B(xab)])$$
Axiom 22 Density Axiom for Betweenness.
$$x \neq z \to \exists y[x\neq y \land z \neq y \land B(xyz)]$$
Axiom 23
$$[B(xyz) \land B(x'y'z')\land xy \equiv x'y'\land yz \equiv y'z'] \to xz \equiv x'z'$$
Axiom 24
$$[B(xyz) \land B(x'y'z')\land xz \equiv x'z' \land yz \equiv y'z'] \to xy \equiv x'y'$$