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
4
votes
6 answers

Intuitive reason of why the negation of $P \Rightarrow Q$ is $P \land \neg Q$ instead of $P \Rightarrow \neg Q$

I'm trying to figure out in an intuitive way the reason why the negation of $P\Rightarrow Q$ is $P \land \neg Q$ and not $P \Rightarrow \neg Q$; I'm trying to figure out with phrases like "if today is sunny then this afternoon I'll go to the sea",…
Bernkastel
  • 2,162
4
votes
0 answers

Ordering logical theories by relative consistency

Define an order $\leq$ on strong enough consistent logical theories by $T \leq U$ if $U, \text{Con}(U) \vdash \text{Con}(T)$. What does this order look like? Is it linear (for any $T$ and $U$, either $T \leq U$ or $U \leq T$)? If it's not linear,…
user775425
4
votes
0 answers

The Barcan schema in Modal logic

On page 11 of this article by Timothy Williamson http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10670-013-9474-z#page-12 the Barcan schema in first-order modal logic is discussed. Williamson says, "Informally, it says that if there could have been…
Ravi
  • 51
4
votes
6 answers

Validate my reasoning for this logical equivalence

I've basically worked out how to do this question but not sure about my reasoning: Question: Show 1) $(p \rightarrow q) \land (q \rightarrow (\lnot p \lor r))$ is logically equivalent to: 2) $p \rightarrow (q \land r)$ and I am given this…
Arvin
  • 1,733
4
votes
1 answer

Metalogic: Prove $\{\neg P_1 \to P_2\} \vdash (\neg P_2\to P_1)$ without using the Deduction Theorem

I want to prove that $$\{\neg P_1\to P_2\} \vdash (\neg P_2\to P_1)$$ without using the Deduction Theorem. I'm not sure how to proceed. The class notes are all we have to work from, no text to work on similar proofs.
4
votes
9 answers

Negation of "If ... then" statements

I am just being introduced to how logic is used in mathematics and my lecturer mentioned that $\sim(P\rightarrow Q) \equiv p\ \wedge\sim q$. This is quite hard to grasp at first glance, so he gave an example - The negation of "if $x\neq 0$ then…
Ethan Mark
  • 2,167
4
votes
3 answers

False(ified) Axioms

Don't really know how to title this one. I'm working on a real analysis question that says: In one sentence write down the reason why $(1=2)\land (2=3)\to (1=3)$ (and similar substitutions) don't lead to false statements when we use the…
user68093
  • 115
4
votes
2 answers

Logical form and validity of argument

I'm trying to wrap my head around this new subject. I have to determine the validity of this argument (using a truth table): "If Steve went to the movies then Maria's sister would not have stayed home. Either Steve went to the movies or…
4
votes
1 answer

Is more than one free variable necessary for the axiom schemas in Peano arithmetic and ZFC set theory?

The axiom schema of induction in Peano Arithmetic that I read about in Wikipedia concerns a tuple of free variables $(x, y_1,..., y_k)$. My question is whether more than $x$ is necessary. In other words, would the theory be strictly weaker if we…
user107952
  • 20,508
4
votes
1 answer

$\Sigma^0_1$-soundness of $T\supset PA$

When $T\supset PA$ is $\Sigma^0_1$-sound, is it true that $T\vdash Pr(\underline\phi)$ implies $T\vdash \phi $ for any sentence $\phi $? Where $Pr$ is the provability predicate. If not, is it true for $\phi$ which are $\Pi^0_1$? Any help is…
user52534
  • 751
4
votes
1 answer

What has a higher operation priority?

As you read the question above what has a higher operation priority from these two logical operations $"\models" or "\Rightarrow"$ ? I stumbled on a proof of a tautological entailemnt without parenthesis stating $\models A \Rightarrow B$. How do you…
4
votes
2 answers

Difference between predicate logic statements

Translating these statements from predicate logic to English: are these the saying the same thing essentially or is there a difference? $\forall x~(Fx \vee \neg Fx)$ $\forall x~Fx ~\lor~ \forall x~\lnot Fx$
4
votes
4 answers

Can you introduce a tautology directly into a proof?

For the sake of simplicity, let us restrict the context of this question to classical propositional logic. When formally evaluating the validity of an argument, is it permitted to immediately introduce a proposition that is a tautology? For example,…
RyRy the Fly Guy
  • 5,950
  • 1
  • 11
  • 27
4
votes
1 answer

Compactness Theorem- Why not Counterexample?

The compactness theorem states that if every finite subset of a set of logical statements is consistent, then the overall set of statements is consistent. So, why is the following set of statements (each of which could be formalized under the rules…
4
votes
1 answer

Is logical implication always determinable from just the given statements?

I am reading introductory texts on logic and am having a hard time understanding intuitively logical implication. Specifically, I am wondering if logical implication can always be determined by two statements, P and Q alone? I'll try to give an…
masiewpao
  • 2,217