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
23
votes
7 answers

Why is it that if "A is sufficient for B" then "B is necessary for A"?

I know this may sound like a basic question in mathematical logic, implications and/or conditionals. But I haven't been able to find a simple and clear explanation as to why do we automatically call $B$ necessary for $A$, whenever we are given the…
user135626
  • 1,309
22
votes
6 answers

Why is predicate "all" as in all(SET) true if the SET is empty?

Can anyone explain why the predicate all is true for an empty set? If the set is empty, there are no elements in it, so there is not really any elements to apply the predicate on? So it feels to me it should be false rather than true.
bodacydo
  • 3,922
22
votes
9 answers

Implication in mathematics - How can A imply B when A is False?

I have just started studying implication in mathematics. So, you'll probably have an idea of where my confusion lies right from the get go. In the truth table, where $A \implies B$ we obtain this result: A | B |A->B ___________ T | T | T T | F | F F…
user2901512
  • 2,080
21
votes
8 answers

What is the logical operator for but?

I saw a sentence like, I am fine but he has flu. Now I have to convert it into logical sentence using logical operators. I do not have any idea what should but be translated to. Please help me out. Thanks
user2857
21
votes
2 answers

Gödel's incompleteness theorem and real closed fields

I am familiar with the result of Gödel's incompleteness theorem. I find it hard though, to convince myself that when we replace normal number arithmetic with real closed fields, that there is an axiomatic system that is complete. After all,…
user12205
21
votes
3 answers

What is the difference between a predicate and function?

I need to to understand the difference between predicates and functions in the context of Clasual Form Logic in order to define the Herbrand universe. If I have p(x) :- q(f(x)) would I be right in saying that p and q are predicates while f is a…
Jason
  • 321
20
votes
12 answers

Trouble understanding only one way implication truth

I'm having a trouble understanding the concept. Can you give me a math example where $P\Rightarrow Q$ Is true but $P\Leftrightarrow Q$ is false? Thank you.
Rodrigo Sango
  • 279
  • 3
  • 9
20
votes
4 answers

What is the basis for a proof?

What is the basis for a proof? I am trying to understand what a proof is, what is the most simple example of a proof? like can you have a 'proof' for $1+1=2$?
20
votes
1 answer

Is a Gödel sentence logically valid?

This might be an elementary question, but I am just beginning to learn logic theory. From wikipedia article on Gödel's incompleteness theorems Any effectively generated theory capable of expressing elementary arithmetic cannot be both consistent…
19
votes
3 answers

Proper way to read $\forall$ - "for all" or "for every"?

I was asked in class the other day by a professor for whom English is a second language why $\forall$ is sometimes read "for all" while other times read "for every." Is there a rule for this? I was thinking it might be read "for every" for finite…
19
votes
4 answers

How can I correct my wrong Intuition that $\forall \, x \, \in \,\emptyset : P(x) \quad $ is false?

Source: p. 69. How to Prove It by Daniel Velleman. I already read 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 & 12. $\exists \, x \, \in \, \emptyset : P(x) \tag{1}$ will be false no matter what the statement $P(x)$ is. There can be nothing in $\emptyset$…
user53259
18
votes
4 answers

How does one show a set of axioms is independent? (of each other?)

I am being asked to show that the groups axioms of existence of an identity, of inverses and of associativity are independent. Does this mean that none of two of them imply the third? That is: do I have to exhibit a "bad" group which has two but…
Pedro
  • 122,002
18
votes
1 answer

Why is it sensical for a proposition with a false antecedent to validate to true?

In propositional logic, the statement "If pigs can fly, then elephants can lay eggs." validates to true because the antecedent validates to false. In other words, given $a \rightarrow b$, if a is false, the entire statement is true. Why? Just…
David Faux
  • 3,425
18
votes
1 answer

What is a definable set?

I've read the definition a bunch of times but I don't quite understand it. What is meant by $(M,\in)$ satisfies $\varphi(x;a_1,\ldots)$? Recall that a set $X$ is a definable over a model $(M, \in)$, where $M$ is a set, if there exists a formula…
user2034
  • 489
17
votes
6 answers

Proving $(p \to (q \to r)) \to ((p \to q) \to (p \to r))$

I'm looking for a way to prove $$ (p \to (q \to r)) \to ((p \to q) \to (p \to r)) $$ from the axioms $$ \begin{align} & p \to (q \to p) \\ & (p \to (p \to q)) \to (p \to q) \\ & (p \to q) \to ((q \to r) \to (p \to r)) \\ & (\sim p \to \, \sim…
toph
  • 243