Consider Ortholattices (OL). (The same remarks hold for OML, MOL, and BA.) We started with an equational basis B1 in terms of join, meet, and complement. To show that a set of equations B2 in terms of the Sheffer stroke is a basis for OL, we showed that B1 is definitionally equivalent to B2, using the standard definitions.
This section is a summary of our view of definitional equivalence.
An equational definition has the form
f(x1,x2,...,xn) = alpha
where
If we have a theory T, and if we add a definition of a new operation, say f, we get a definitional extension of T, say T'. The important property of T' is that if we have a statement S not involving f, we can prove S in T iff we can prove S in T'; that is, T' is a conservative extension of T.
Two theories T1 and T2 are definitionally equivalent if each has a definitional extension, say T1' and T2', such that T1' and T2' are equivalent.
For example, consider the two theories
T1 | T2
----------------------------------------|----------------------------
c(c(x) v y) v x = x. | f(x,y) = f(y,x).
c(c(x) v y) v (z v y) = y v (z v x). | f(f(x,y),f(x,f(y,z))) = x.
----------------------------------------|----------------------------
Extend each theory by defining the operations in the other theory.
T1' | T2'
----------------------------------------|----------------------------
c(c(x) v y) v x = x. | f(x,y) = f(y,x).
c(c(x) v y) v (z v y) = y v (z v x). | f(f(x,y),f(x,f(y,z))) = x.
|
f(x,y) = c(x) v c(y). | x v y = f(f(x,x),f(y,y)).
| c(x) = f(x,x).
----------------------------------------|----------------------------
If we can show the extended theories to be equivalent,
then we have shown T1 and T2 to be definitionally equivalent.
Note that it is not sufficient to prove (T1' => T2) and (T2' => T1). We must prove the definitions in the other theory as well the axioms.
In this example, T1 and T2 are definitionally equivalent: T1 is Boolean algebra in terms of join and complement, and T2 is Boolean algebra in terms of the Sheffer stroke. The proofs are difficult!