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
3 answers

Can I simplify: $(¬P ∧ Q) ∨ (P ∧ ¬Q)$?

I got stuck on this development: $$\begin{align} (¬P ∧ Q) ∨ (P ∧ ¬Q) & \iff ((¬P ∧ Q) ∨ P) ∧ ((¬P ∧ Q) ∨ ¬Q) \tag{1} \\ &\iff (P ∨ Q) ∧ (¬P ∨ ¬Q) \tag{2} \\ \end{align}$$ Can't this also be written as this using the associative and tautology…
4
votes
2 answers

Restrictions on universal generalization

Wikipedia's article on universal generalization doesn't seem to give a satisfactory explanation of the restrictions on when it can be used: Assume $\Gamma$ is a set of formulas, $\varphi$ a formula, and $\Gamma \vdash \varphi(y)$ has been derived. …
jwodder
  • 1,497
4
votes
2 answers

Distribution Axiom of Modal Logic

Is it possible to prove the distribution axiom of modal logic? I have proven all the conclusions of propositional modal logic using this axiom, the definitions of the four standard modal operators, and the postulate that some contingent proposition…
4
votes
2 answers

The contrapositive

Considering an arbitrary model, is law of the excluded middle the weakest axiom needed to make the contrapositive of a statement logically equivalent to the statement? I've seen and done the first order logic proof of it, but what about other kinds…
aaron
  • 229
4
votes
6 answers

How to explain that $A \implies B$ is true when $A$ is false

I'm teaching my little sister propositional logic per her request. I was trying to explain to her why $A \implies B$ holds whenever $A$ is false, and I didn't succeed with that. I referred her to the definition: $A \implies B$ is true if whenever…
4
votes
3 answers

A function defined for all inputs?

This might seem like a weird question, but is it actually possible to define a function for all possible inputs? By this, I really mean /all/ possible inputs, including numbers, true and false, sets, sets of sets, other functions,…
4
votes
2 answers

Why there's difference between $\forall x \in T\ \exists y \in S\ F(x,y)$ and $\exists y \in S\ \forall x \in T\ F(x,y)$

I don't understand why there's difference between $\forall x \in T\ \exists y \in S\ F(x,y)$ and $\exists y \in S\ \forall x \in T\ F(x,y)$. It sems that it's exactly same thing just order is changed like 2+3 and 3+2. So it means $\forall$ and…
Templar
  • 1,743
4
votes
2 answers

Prove an equation is always false

How can I prove an equation is always false? For example: $b = b + 1$ is false for all values of $b$. Very simple to see. Now given a more complicated equation, such as: $b = \sin(\sin(b) - 0.56)$ How can I prove that some value of $b$ does (or…
4
votes
2 answers

Prove that $p \leftrightarrow \sim q \equiv (\sim p \wedge q)\vee (p\wedge\sim q)$

I've been trying to solve this for about an hour now, but I keep getting stuck after a few steps. Here's what I have so far: $(p \rightarrow \sim q)\wedge(\sim q \rightarrow p)$........................(Definition of $\leftrightarrow$) $(\sim p \vee…
4
votes
1 answer

How do I prove double negation elimination in a propositional logic axiom system?

Here are my axioms: $X \rightarrow (Y \rightarrow X)$ $(X \rightarrow (Y \rightarrow Z)) \rightarrow ((X \rightarrow Y) \rightarrow (X \rightarrow Z))$ $(\lnot Y \rightarrow \lnot X) \rightarrow ((\lnot Y \rightarrow X) \rightarrow Y)$ You can use…
James
  • 69
4
votes
2 answers

Logic - how to write $\exists !x$ without the $\exists !$ symbol

What is $\exists !$ equivalent to? I need to write $\exists !x \,P(x)$ without using the $\exists !$ symbol; thus, I am wondering what the $\exists !$ symbol is equivalent to.
Torched90
  • 353
4
votes
1 answer

Is there any identity which cannot be proved

For example, if we want to prove that $a^2+b^2\ge 2ab$ for all $a,b\in\mathbb{R}$, we will start from something which is true (axiom or something that is already proved). In this case we will use fact that square of any real number cannot be…
user164524
4
votes
1 answer

How far can a logical sentence with only two variables be simplified?

Given any sentence in sentential logic with two variables ($\mathbf{P}$ and $\mathbf{Q}$), is it possible to reduce it to an equivalent sentence where each variable is only invoked once? As an example off the top of my head, let's take a…
Twisol
  • 143
  • 5
4
votes
1 answer

Proving $P$ by proving $\neg Q$ and knowing $P\lor Q$

This may sound silly. I used to remember studying this in physics class and I thought of asking it in physics.stackexchange and then later I decided to ask it here itself. Let's say, under some conditions,a variable $x$ can either have $2$ values…
Dinesh
  • 105
3
votes
3 answers

Robinson arithmetic and its incompleteness

Wikipedia in Italian has a sketch-of-proof that Robinson arithmetic is not complete, since commutativity of addition is undecidable. The sketch of proof creates a model that adds two elements, $a$ and $b$, to the usual natural numbers: then it goes…
mau
  • 9,774