Questions tagged [logic]

Questions about mathematical logic, including model theory, proof theory, computability theory (a.k.a. recursion theory), and non-standard logics. Questions which merely seek to apply logical or formal reasoning to other areas of mathematics should not use this tag. Consider using one of the following tags as well, if they fit the question: (model-theory), (set-theory), (computability), and (proof-theory). This tag is not for logical puzzles, use (puzzle).

This tag broadly covers the field of mathematical logic, which deals with questions involving formalized mathematical statements, mathematical structures, and their relationships. The development of mathematical logic in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was intertwined with the interest in foundations of mathematics (), although much current work in logic is not directly related to foundations.

The elementary content of mathematical logic involves formal mathematical languages, quantifiers, and formal proofs of statements. These formal proofs are carried out in formal proof systems (see ), which model ordinary mathematical reasoning but, unlike natural language proofs, have a fully specified syntax and grammar that could in principle be verified mechanically. Specific tags for these topics include and . The full development of these ideas happens in the field of . A well known application of proof-theoretic methods is Gödel's incompleteness theorem .

The field of studies models of formal languages. Examples include algebraic structures such as groups and rings, as well as more esoteric structures. The field focuses on definability within such structures, relative to particular formal languages.

The field of studies formalized notations of computability, such as Turing computability and hyperarithmetical computability, as well as their applications to mathematics.

The field of studies sets by considering formal axiomatic systems of set theory such as ZFC. Questions about basic topics that might be found in "Chapter 0" of an undergraduate textbook (such as unions, intersections, subsets, etc.) are classified on this site as , while the includes questions about models of ZFC, large cardinals, the method of forcing, etc. Some researchers view set theory as part of mathematical logic, while others view it as a distinct area; the logic tag is not mandatory for set theory questions.

There are other areas which overlap with mathematical logic, but are not always considered part of it. The field of has many similarities to logic, and has important foundational aspects.

The foundational aspects of logic include mathematical constructivism, which is classified here as .


This tag does not include questions about ordinary logical reasoning in mathematical proof writing. Questions that ask about the logical structure or logical methods of ordinary mathematical proofs should be labeled with the tag unless they ask about specific formal proof systems.

This tag should not be used for what a layperson might called "a logical puzzle". For these sort of questions please use and as appropriate. (Unless the solution is done via a method relevant to the logic tag, of course.)

27971 questions
5
votes
1 answer

Incompleteness and Uncertainty related?

I was reading Gödel's incompleteness theorem and Heisenbers's uncertainty principle. I found some similarities although one is based on a physical phenomenon and the other is mathematical. Q: Are they interrelated? Can one interpret the…
5
votes
0 answers

Difference between a variable and an indeterminate

What are the differences and common points between a variable and an indeterminate ? Is an indeterminate also a variable ? Thank you EDIT : I am not trying to solve anything in particular, it was just by reading the definition of both on Wikipedia…
Pop Flamingo
  • 807
  • 1
  • 8
  • 17
5
votes
4 answers

Natural deduction proof of $\forall x (\exists y (P(x) \vee Q(y))) \vdash \exists y (\forall x (P(x) \vee Q(y)))$

I'm trying to do a Fitch proof of $$ \forall x (\exists y (P(x) \vee Q(y))) \vdash \exists y (\forall x (P(x) \vee Q(y))) $$ Edit: using only the axioms on http://www.proofwiki.org/wiki/Category:Natural_Deduction_Axioms, along with…
5
votes
1 answer

Understanding Structural Induction

I have a problem with the intuition behind structural induction. We didn't define it rigorously in my lecture and I don't get the concept yet. The concrete example of what I don't understand is proving that for terms $r$,$s$ and a free variable u,…
azureai
  • 1,772
5
votes
1 answer

Gödel's Proof book - circular reasoning?

Trying to make my way through the book Gödel's Proof (Nagel & Newman, edited by Hofstadter). In chapter V, the authors are showing that the axioms of sentential calculus are not contradictory. In short, they say (or seem to say): Let's assume that…
5
votes
1 answer

How to formulate the requirements that a counterexample must satisfy?

Let $p_1, p_2$ and $p_3$ be three statements. Suppose now we know that if $p_1$ is true, then $p_2$ and $p_3$ are equivalent. That is, if $p_1$ and $p_2$ are true, then $p_3$ is true, and if $p_1$ and $p_3$ are true, then $p_2$ is true. Now I want…
Tim
  • 47,382
5
votes
3 answers

Logic and Metamath book recommendation

Recently, I got interested in Mathematical Logic and now I am looking for good introductory books on Mathematical Logic for beginners. In fact, I plan to read some good books on Metamathematics also. So, if possible, in your answer mention…
user170039
5
votes
1 answer

Can something be unprovable, but proved to not be proven unprovable?

I was thinking about the incompleteness theorem. In a book it said that say RH might be unprovable and that a Mathematician could be working on a problem that is unprovable. But, was wondering is it even worse than that. Are there problems such…
simplicity
  • 3,694
5
votes
6 answers

Isn't the modus ponens just the definition of what 'if' means?

Since long ago I've been feeling uneasy about the modus ponens. It's sometimes presented as if it were a sort of discovery or a law of how things are. I think it simply describes what the sentence structure "If ... then ..." means. It's basically…
isarandi
  • 352
5
votes
1 answer

A question about Goodstein's theorem

It is known that if Peano's Arithmetic (PA)-which is a first order theory-is consistent, then Goodstein's theorem is an example of a sentence of PA that can be neither proved nor disproved in PA. Is it known whether this undecidability of…
5
votes
2 answers

Is there a way of making the notion of "stronger theorem" precise?

Mathematicians frequently speak of a theorem being stronger than another. But on its face, this does not make sense, since all theorems in a formal system imply each other, hence are equivalent. Is there some paper or text where this notion is made…
user107952
  • 20,508
5
votes
3 answers

Why is the implication “If Tuesday is a day of the week, then I am a penguin.” a false implication?

I can guess it is because I am a penguin is false, and t->f is false. But isn't "I am a penguin" by itself just a proposition and is not inherently true or false. Can't it be true that "I am a penguin"? Then why is the above implication false?
null
  • 355
5
votes
2 answers

How to find out if a set of Propositional formulas is complete?

A set $\sum$ of formulas in propositional logic is complete if for each propositional formula $\phi$ either $\sum \vdash \phi$ or $\sum \vdash \neg \phi$. Clearly every inconsistent set of formulas is complete because of the following lemma Lemma:…
M a m a D
  • 433
5
votes
1 answer

Independence of Axioms in an axiomatic system

How do we show that we are using independent axioms in an axiomatic systems i.e $A\rightarrow (B \rightarrow A)$ $(A\rightarrow (B\rightarrow C)) \rightarrow ((A\rightarrow B)\rightarrow (A\rightarrow C))$ $(\lnot A\rightarrow \lnot B)\rightarrow…
hmmmm
  • 5,616
5
votes
4 answers

Writing "$f$ is not a bijection" with quantifiers only

Is it possible to write '$f$ is NOT a bijection' with quantifiers only, and without using "$\neg$"? What is the negation of "$\exists$!"?