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
14
votes
1 answer

Distinction between equality, logical equivalence and biconditionality.

This is my first post here so I'm not sure about the proper etiquette, but I have quite a few questions all pertaining to one underlying concept, and I hope it's okay that I've grouped them all into one post. I'm completely new to logic, or at the…
14
votes
3 answers

Difference or relation between Inference, Reasoning, Deduction, and Induction?

What is the precise difference or relation between these terms in logic: Inference, Reasoning, Deduction, and Induction?
14
votes
2 answers

What is an example of a Transfinite Argument?

I was in a discussion today with a philosopher about the merit of the technique of "proof by contradiction." He mentioned the Law of Excluded Middle, wherein we (typically as mathematicians) assume that we either have P or Not P. That is, if we…
Rachel
  • 2,874
14
votes
4 answers

How to find the logical formula for a given truth table?

Let's say I have a truth table like this: X Y A t t f t f t f t t f f f Now, I have to find the formula for A. This case is rather easy because I can immediately see that this looks like the inverted values of X~B, thus ¬(X~B). Now, for…
user3527
  • 143
13
votes
5 answers

Odd proof method

I read on the wikipedia article for the Riemann Hypothesis that some theorems have been proved by assuming the hypothesis to be true and then false and proving the certain theorem from both cases. I.e. proving $P\Rightarrow Q$ and $\neg P\Rightarrow…
Robearz
  • 886
13
votes
1 answer

Is quantum logic producing interesting/different mathematics?

Is quantum logic producing interesting/different mathematics? Is it different from the intuitionist approach to mathematics? How?
Uri
  • 403
13
votes
2 answers

What is the difference between syntactic and semantic completeness?

It is apparent to me what the difference between syntactic consistency and semantic consistency is. A theory $T$ is syntactically consistent if there exists no formula $\phi$ in the language such that both $\phi$ and $\neg \phi$ are provable. A…
13
votes
2 answers

In formal logic, what is the converse of 'all'?

Suppose a statement $P$ is true for all values of $n$. Would the converse of this be The statement is not true for some values of $n$? The statement is not true for no values of $n$? I am inclined to believe that the former is the correct answer,…
Trogdor
  • 10,331
13
votes
4 answers

Prove that a set of connectives is inadequate

It is relatively easy to prove that a given set of connectives is adequate. It suffices to show that the standard connectives can be built from the given set. It is proven that the set $\{\lor, \land, \neg\}$ is adequate, and from that set it can be…
Pampero
  • 337
13
votes
3 answers

How to prove an axiom system is consistent?

I would like to know whether systems capable of proving other systems consistent, use any methods fundamentally different then 'Add 'T is consistent' as axiom, then T is consistent, QED'. How does eg. ZFC prove that PA is consistent? Does it all…
TROLLHUNTER
  • 8,728
12
votes
3 answers

Three doors logic problem

Imagine three doors where behind one door $\text{A}$ there is a new car, behind door $\text{B}$ there is a goat, and behind door $\text{C}$ there is a new car and a goat. The problem is that each door is labeled incorrectly... If you can open only…
JohnWO
  • 2,089
  • 14
  • 29
12
votes
3 answers

Why truth table is not used in logic?

One day, I bought Principia Mathematica and saw a lot of proofs of logical equations, such as $\vdash p \implies p$ or $\vdash \lnot (p \wedge \lnot p)$. (Of course there's bunch of proofs about rel&set in later) After reading these proofs, I…
JiminP
  • 1,670
12
votes
1 answer

Is there more than one Rosser sentence?

Let $T$ be a recursively axiomatized consistent extension of PA (if you're so inclined you can replace PA everywhere with Robinson's Q). Let $\mathrm{bws}_T(p,\varphi)$ be the proof predicate, expressing that $p$ is a proof in $T$ of $\varphi$ and…
Miha Habič
  • 7,164
12
votes
1 answer

Multiplication via squaring and addition

Is it possible to define multiplication of two positive integers only using addition and squaring? Of course I have $5 \cdot 3 = 5 + 5 + 5$ but I would like something without saying do this $n$-times. Peano Arithmetic has the following two…
Sqyuli
  • 600
12
votes
4 answers

Statements with no counterexample

Is there some proven statement that tells us "not all X satisfy Y", but there are currently no examples of X which do not satisfy Y? Is it necessarily true that there are always explicit counterexamples? Or are there statements that only guarantee…
Chad
  • 121