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
0 answers

Decidability and effective enumerability

My problem is as follows: Show that a set $A$ of expressions is effectively enumerable iff there is a decidable set $B$ of pairs $\langle\alpha, n\rangle$ (consisting of an expression $\alpha$ and an integer $n$) such that $A=\operatorname{dom}B$.…
kkkk
  • 49
2
votes
1 answer

Between two different numbers exists another different number

Formalize the following statement "between two different numbers exists another different number". I know that the answer is $$∀x∀y((x
Dave93
  • 341
2
votes
2 answers

How to prove that $x\epsilon\cap_{i \in I}(A_i\cup B_i)$ $\neq$ $x \in (\cap_{i \in I}A_i)\cup(\cap_{i \in I}B_i)$

I can make sense of why these two equations are not equivalent intuitively but I cannot prove them on paper. For $x\in\cap_{i \in I}(A_i\cup B_i)$ I end up with: $\forall(i \in I \rightarrow (x \in A_i \lor x \in B_i)$) which to me is equivalent to…
Bavneet
  • 121
  • 6
2
votes
1 answer

Derivation of deMorgans using basic inference rules.

Using only the ten primitive inference rules how do you derive: $$ \lnot (A \land B) $$ from $$(\lnot A \lor \lnot B)$$ The basic rules are 5 (one for each connective) In and Out or Add and Eliminate. The primitive rules are supposed to be a…
mbr_at_ml
  • 121
2
votes
1 answer

Does bivalence hold in principle of explosion?

Bivalence states that statements without free variables are either true or false, not both. On Wikipedia, there is a demonstration of the principle of explosion: We know that "Not all lemons are yellow", as it has been assumed to be true. We know…
J-A-S
  • 621
2
votes
2 answers

Does mathematical logic have concepts for "validity" and "soundness" of "arguments"?

Gensler's Introduction to Logic says In logic, an argument is a set of statements consisting of premises (sup- porting evidence) and a conclusion (based on this evidence). Arguments put reasoning into words. Logicians call statements…
Tim
  • 47,382
2
votes
2 answers

Can we prove we know all the ways to prove things?

The things like induction and contradiction, they're all ways we prove things. Is that set of ways to prove things complete? Does the self referential nature of this question make it unprovable with something related to Gödel's incompleteness…
2
votes
1 answer

How to calculate how long it takes for a certain amount of parallel-time events to happen?

I have multiple events (labeled $a, b, c,\dots$) that happen every $t_a, t_b, t_c$ times, they are certain (not random!). An easy example would be: 3 events, (a) one every hour ($t_a = 60$ min), (b) one every two hours ($t_b = 120$ min), (c) one…
2
votes
1 answer

Role of Tautologies in logic

I apologize if the title is inadequate. I am reading Loomis and Sternberg's Advanced Calculus textbook. After introducing the notation of a quantification and defining a tautology, they state: Indeed, any valid principle of reasoning that does not…
John P.
  • 2,136
2
votes
1 answer

Question on logic from the course "Introduction to mathematical thinking" on coursera

The question goes this way: Give a useful (and hence natural sounding) denial of each of the following statements. Fred will go but he will not play. This is how I attempted to solve the problem: Let A: Fred will go and let B: He'll play. The…
2
votes
6 answers

Logical equivalence without truth table in if statement

The original proposition is (If I ace this exam, then i will be happy).Why is it option b rather option a when they both make sense.I know i can draw the truth table out to prove the logical equivalence but is there any way i can infer from the…
NixyCron
  • 21
  • 1
2
votes
1 answer

Is the or statement always inclusive in Mathematics?

My question is about when the statement has a potential of inclusivity, for example a statement like "It's either day time or night time" will obviously be exclusive as it's a logical contradiction if we are in day time and night time…
Sergio
  • 1,821
2
votes
0 answers

How to define plural quantifiers in terms of more primitive concepts?

I saw this question earlier today and was trying to figure out how to determine one way or the other whether a most quantifier can be implemented using plural quantifiers. Then I read the SEP article on plural quantifiers and now I'm really confused…
Greg Nisbet
  • 11,657
2
votes
3 answers

Truth, Proof and Axiomatic Systems

I still struggle mighty with basic conceptions of truth and proof. For example: The Continuum Hypothesis (CH) is either true or false, i.e. either CH or ~CH holds. Now, Goedel and Cohen proved that CH/~CH are independent from ZFC, so ZFC + CH and…
user774814
2
votes
3 answers

I am not able to understand these lines from deductive reasoning

" Conclusion can only be false if atleast one of the premises is also false. If both premises are true, then conclusion is also true. We will say that argument is valid if the premise cannot be all true without the conclusion being true as well. …
Jessica Griffin
  • 222
  • 1
  • 10