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
2
votes
1 answer

Demonstrating seconds Morgan's law using the first one and double negation

These are the 2 Morgan's laws: 1. NOT(A ^ B) = NOT(A) v NOT(B) 2. NOT(A v B) = NOT(A) ^ NOT(B) This is the double negation law: NOT(NOT(R)) = R My solution (after 30 min) to find the second Morgan's law using the first Morgan's law and the…
user168764
2
votes
3 answers

Modus Ponens Proof

I have written the truth table for all of the forms of $P$ and $Q$.Then maintained the table to find $P \rightarrow Q $ and $[(P \rightarrow Q) \wedge P]$.As we know, we can write arguments in forms of $[Expression_{one} \wedge…
FreeMind
  • 2,539
  • 3
  • 20
  • 41
2
votes
1 answer

First order language and symbols

What is language? What is metalanguage? 3.What are symbols? Am I right in saying following: Any first order language consists of logical and non logical symbols. Where logical symbols consists of (i) sentential connective symbols(negation,…
Sushil
  • 2,821
2
votes
2 answers

Confused about how to use semantic tableau to answer questions of satisfiability

I'm taking a course in Mathematical Logic right now and we have to use semantic tableau to find out if a formula is satisfiable (some interpretations give a value of T). My question is: Given these examples for logical formulas A and B: How do I…
2
votes
2 answers

Is it acceptable in formal logic to achieve proof by contradiction by obtaining the negation of the assumption made?

I am (re-)working through the Gensler logic book to refresh my command of formal logic. For the most part, he is using proof by contradiction to achieve results. I noticed that the proofs I am writing are somewhat different from his own. Typically,…
readyready15728
  • 253
  • 2
  • 5
2
votes
3 answers

prove $(A \rightarrow B) \rightarrow (\neg B \rightarrow \neg A)$ in Hilbert System

I'm looking for a way to prove : $$(A \rightarrow B) \rightarrow (\neg B \rightarrow \neg A)$$ From the axioms : A1) $(A) \rightarrow ( B \rightarrow A )$ A2) $(A \rightarrow ( B \rightarrow C )) \rightarrow((A\rightarrow…
2
votes
1 answer

Beginner boolean algebra

I'm an absolute beginner to boolean algebra, learning about logic circuits and am having a hard time with simplifying my expression. Starting with three inputs (A, B, and C) and ending with two outputs (X, Y) I'm having trouble simplifying output…
user25976
  • 123
2
votes
1 answer

∀c:(∃d:(c⋅d=b)→(c=S0∨∃a:(c=SS0⋅a))) means b is a power of 2?

I was reading a book entitled Godel, Escher, Bach and one of its problems asks how a person can write that B is a power of 2 in its TNT language. One solution I found online reads: ∀c:(∃d:(c⋅d=b)→(c=S0∨∃a:(c=SS0⋅a))) So as I read this, it means: …
2
votes
2 answers

Proof by Contradiction with Multiple Axioms

Looking at proofs by contradiction and it seems I've run into something that does not sit well with me. I am fine with the law of the excluded middle (thus not an intuitionist) and more fundamentally the Principle of Explosion seems reasonable. The…
AER
  • 272
2
votes
2 answers

$S+A$ inconsistent while $ S+A+B$ consistent

Q1: If $S$ is a set of axioms, and $A$ and $B$ are statements, is it possible that $S+A$ is inconsistent but $S+A+B$ is consistent? Added. Q2: If $X+Y$, $Y+Z$ and $X+Z$ are consistent, is $X+Y+Z$ necessarily consistent?
user20962
2
votes
3 answers

How and why can a true statement *never* imply something false?

The premise of 'proof by contradiction' is that a true statement can never imply a false statement. In my lectures (intro to logic), this has been brushed aside as 'obvious', but is there a formal proof for this fact?
beep-boop
  • 11,595
2
votes
1 answer

How to find the truth values of something like this? If 3×5 = 15, then 3+5=10

The question was to find the truth values of if 3×5=15, then 3+5=10? Is the truth table corresponding to p $\implies $q ? Or is it more complicated than that? Do we have to consider something like $(p \land q \implies r ) \implies (p \lor q \implies…
S.Dan
  • 1,115
2
votes
1 answer

Incompleteness theorem and regarding consistency of theory $T$

By Godel's incompleteness theorems, a formula expressing consistency of a theory that can contain Peano arithmetic cannot be derived or contained from/in the theory. Godel's completeness theorem states that if a formula $\phi$ is true in every…
2
votes
1 answer

How do I read a ⊢ ab in mathematical logic?

I'm beginning to read the interesting Introduction to Mathematical Logic, by Detlovs and Podnieks, but I'm having some troubles with a few simple concepts. In an early paragraph, the following theory is described: Our second example of a formal…
ivarec
  • 133
2
votes
0 answers

Showing non-independence of a statement with respect to an axiomatic system

Is it possible to show that either a statement or its negation is non-independent of say, ZFC, without actually proving or disproving said statements? The reason I ask is because I've read of proofs of some number-theoretic statements which go by…
Zach Halle
  • 163
  • 4