1

How we can prove that the logical result of $\{(p_i \vee $~ $p_{i+1}$$) $$: i \in \mathbb{N} \}$ is effectively enumerable ?

Update: as one user requests, I add my method. I use truth table for check the result but I'm sure there is a flaw and other method must be used.

Carl Mummert
  • 81,604
Mikhaeil Minaoli
  • 19
  • 1
    Welcome to math.SE! This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level. – user37238 Apr 02 '15 at 10:17
  • okey @user37238 thanks so much. thanks for your welcome, really I get stuck in how method must be used. there is a lemma in my note, but without proof. – Mikhaeil Minaoli Apr 02 '15 at 10:22
  • 1
    http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1204879/completness-and-set-of-result-of-one-set/1206510#1206510 – abc Apr 02 '15 at 11:00
  • This has been asked before for previous questions you have asked: please do not over-tag your questions. This question is not related to first-order logic, so that tag should not be included. What does need to be added is a better description of the question; as it stands the question is not understandable to me. What is the "logical result of a set"? @Mikhaeil Minaoli – Carl Mummert Apr 02 '15 at 11:22
  • @Sebastian this is a similar link, but what do u mean by "The last can be checked by truth tables." the mentioned link hasn't answer to my question !? – Mikhaeil Minaoli Apr 02 '15 at 11:40
  • I voted to close this question for a different reason, but there is an answer to this question in Sebastian's answer to the other one (if "logical result" means "logical consequences"), so closing as a duplicate appears to be reasonable. – Carl Mummert Apr 02 '15 at 12:26
  • @Mikhaeil Minaoli: many of the questions you have asked could be improved. Please see http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/9959/how-to-ask-a-good-question for some suggestions. In general, you should always indicate where you encountered the question and what you have already tried. In this case, the solution is somewhat trivial -- the set of consequences of any r.e. set of formulas is again r.e. - which makes the motivation for the question more confusing. – Carl Mummert Apr 02 '15 at 12:29
  • @CarlMummert I have no asked question, I just ask this one as my first question. are you wrong with me? ? – Mikhaeil Minaoli Apr 02 '15 at 12:46
  • thanks from your kind note, the set of consequences of any r.e. set of formulas is again r.e. is not good, because the question say the set of consequences of any r.e. set of formulas is effectively enumerable ? is there any thing different? thanks @CarlMummert – Mikhaeil Minaoli Apr 02 '15 at 12:48
  • @CarlMummert would you please describe it for me? – Mikhaeil Minaoli Apr 02 '15 at 15:30
  • I read it http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/161122/definition-of-effective-enumerability-and-empty-set @CarlMummert but couldn't get the point. – Mikhaeil Minaoli Apr 02 '15 at 15:32
  • your answer about set of consequence is wrong, @Sebastian on that link – Mikhaeil Minaoli Apr 02 '15 at 15:55

0 Answers0