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
3
votes
1 answer

Followup question on first-order formulas in first-order languages and open formulas.

This is a followup question to my question here. I will reproduce the contents of my original question as follows. For any first-order formula $X$ in the first-order language $\langle 0, S, \le\rangle$ (possibly with free variables) does there…
user389821
3
votes
1 answer

Expressing Boolean OR as XOR where operands are XORs

In cryptography, one approach to writing an implementation which is secure against differential power analysis is to use something called masking. With masking, the idea is to convert logical gates from e.g. doing $c = a \oplus b$ to operating on…
3
votes
3 answers

Understanding Inverse Logic

The original statement is, "If I am in Paris, then I am in France". The inverse statement is, "If I am not in Paris, then I am not in France". If $\lnot A = \lnot B =$ True, then $\lnot A \implies \lnot B$ = True. If $\lnot A = \lnot B =$ False,…
The Pointer
  • 4,182
3
votes
2 answers

Logic: Find the prenex form of a formula

I want to find the prenex form of the following formula: $\forall x P(X) \rightarrow \neg (\forall xQ(x) \rightarrow \exists y R(y))$ I found: $\forall x' \forall y \exists x (P(x) \rightarrow \neg (Q(x')\rightarrow R(y)))$ Can someone verify…
user370967
3
votes
1 answer

Sufficient and Necessary

There is a watch you’d like to buy. It costs $100. Each of the following statements tells you something that is sufficient but not necessary, necessary but not sufficient, or both sufficient and necessary in order for you to purchase the watch.…
3
votes
2 answers

Prove or Disprove U' = Ø

It seems obvious to me that the statement is true. If you are looking at the elements that are not in the universal set, there are no elements left, thus you are left with the empty set. However, when I try to prove it, I unpack the definition of U'…
William
  • 89
3
votes
5 answers

$[\frac{1}{x} = 1$ for all real numbers $x]$ is not true or false

I have a follow-up to a previous question: True or false or not-defined statements. (In the following I might use the word statement incorrectly.) In that question/answer I learned that the "statement" that $\frac{1}{0} =1$ is not true or false…
Thomas
  • 43,555
3
votes
1 answer

How can this bit of boolean logic be simplified?

I have greatly simplified down a piece of boolean logic developed from a truth table, but I cannot figure out how to simplify it more. Two of the same variable exist in the different places, which leads me to believe that it can be simplified…
ಠ_ಠ
  • 143
3
votes
1 answer

Omega Inconsistency and Omega Incompleteness

So, recently I was reading Godel, Escher and Bach and came across these terms and I am not quite sure of the difference between them and it is my humble request if someone can explain these terms not in the Hofstadterian sense.
user385287
3
votes
3 answers

Confusion regarding Russell's paradox

Russell's paradox is about a set not in a set itself - but don't all sets are not in sets themselves? $x \in x$ is not true, as {$1,2,3$} $\in$ {$1,2,3$} is not true.. Can anyone explain this?
3
votes
2 answers

Construction of a Henkin Theory

I'm trying to understand Henkin's proof of Gödel's completeness theorem, specifically the construction of a Henkin theory T' with language L' from an arbitrary theory T over a language L. My problem with the proof is that I don't understand why…
3
votes
3 answers

What is the point of the Thinning Rule?

I am studying predicate calculus on some lecture notes on my own. I have a question concerning a strange rule of inference called the Thinning Rule which is stated from the writer as the third rule of inference for the the formal system K$(L)$…
3
votes
2 answers

Intuition about a logic equivalence

It is fairly easy to show that $(P\wedge Q)\to R$ is equivalent to $(P\to R)\lor(Q\to R)$. However I am having trouble having an intuition about this equivalence. My intuition is that if both hypotheses $P$ and $Q$ are required to prove $R$,…
3
votes
2 answers

Proof of a statement involving quantifiers

I've been trying to solve the following exercise of Velleman's "How To Prove It": Prove $\exists x(P(x)\to \forall yP(y))$. Could anybody give a hint on this? I guessed some transformations could be made to the problem, but I'm not quite…
user36546
3
votes
1 answer

Logical validity in first order logic

I'm having a problem understanding something. In an excercise the following statement is wrong and I'm having trouble understanding why. "If $a$ and $b$ are propositions then $(a \lor b)$ is valid if $a$ is valid or $b$ is valid." Why is it wrong?…
Amontillado
  • 1,179