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

An extension of Löb's theorem

This question is an extension question of previous one. link: Löb's theorem and provability Now, there is three sentences, P, Q and R. sort-of-says, they are like following. P: P, Q and R is provable all. Q: P, Q and R is provable all. R: P, Q and…
2
votes
1 answer

Sequent calculus and renaming variable

I have some questions regarding sequent calculus and renaming variable. The first two questions are general questions about rules and the other two are related to some examples. Logical rules These rules says that we should choose a term "t" to…
Spn
  • 123
2
votes
2 answers

When I write that $\frac{1}{x} - \frac{1}{x} = 0$, should I include the fact $x\neq0$?

When I write that $\frac{1}{x} - \frac{1}{x} = 0$, should I include the fact $x\neq0$?
user736730
2
votes
2 answers

Express conjuction, disjunction, etc -> only with negation AND implication

As the title says, I need some help about how to express all of the logical operations, only with negation and implication. So, how do I "convert" conjuction, disjunction, equivalence into negation and implication?
2
votes
1 answer

Interpreting one theory into another

Just a question about interpretations which I'm not sure of: Say we have two theories $T_0$ and $T_1$. Then an interpretation $I$ of $T_0$ into $T_1$ is an interpretation $I$ of the language $L_0$ of $T_0$ into $T_1$ s.t. for every $L_0$-sentence…
user52534
  • 751
2
votes
2 answers

Why is the statement p"implies"q true if p is false?

M: The truth table of p→q says that if p is false and then p→q is true. The author of the books goes on to clarify the doubt people have about the above statement, he uses the following scenario to explain why M is true, "Perhaps you are bothered…
Moin
  • 155
2
votes
1 answer

Translating a statement from plain English to a mathematical expression

I did a logic exercise about which I have a question : considering the booleans A : "Peter is a student" and B : "Julia is a student", what formula represents the statement "Peter is a student if Julia is a student"? I answered $B\Rightarrow A$ but…
2
votes
2 answers

Paths in the city

The figure below represents four linked routes as $ A $ and $ B $ cities. Review a picture and indicate a correct alternative: a) The path is shorter II b) Path II is less than III c) Path III is shorter than IV d) Path II is shorter than IV e)…
2
votes
1 answer

Predicate Logic- English sentences to symbolization

I need help translating English sentences into Predicate logic. 1) If any marbles are round, they all are My Answer: (Ǝx)(Mx and Lx) ⊃ (∀x)(Mx and Lx) Is this correct? 2) If a checker is jumped or crowned, then if all marbles are round it's red My…
2
votes
0 answers

Logic tautology/contradiction and the model

$7.$ (a$ \leftrightarrow b) \leftrightarrow (a \oplus b)$ $8.$ ($\neg a \downarrow \neg b) \oplus \neg (a \oplus b)$ $9.$ (f $\leftrightarrow (a \vee b)) \oplus (\neg a \uparrow \neg b)$ $10.$ (a $\uparrow b) \uparrow (a \rightarrow b)$ $11.$ f…
2
votes
1 answer

Second-order logic and rules of inference

Let's consider second-order logic in full semantics. I read in a paper of Jouko Vaanen that such logic relies entirely on informal reasoning, or to put it in other words: the rules of inference cannot be formalised (in contrast to first-order logic,…
2
votes
2 answers

Doubts on the truth table of $\models$

I'm reading Shawn Hedman's A First Course in Logic: An Introduction to Model Theory, Proof Theory, Computability, and Complexity: Definition 1.18 Formula $G$ is a consequence of formula $F$ if for every assignment $A$, if $A\models F$ then…
Red Banana
  • 23,956
  • 20
  • 91
  • 192
2
votes
1 answer

DeMorgans Law Application

I'm Trying to prove that ¬(p ↔ q) is equivalent to ¬p ↔ q. I have done the work for ¬p ↔ q and simplified it to (p ∨ q) ∧ ¬(p ∧ q) .....My trouble is on the other proposition how do i distribute that not(¬)?
Elchavo18
  • 183
2
votes
1 answer

Am I right at my skolemization?

I am to skolemize the problem below: $$\forall x \exists y \neg(P(x,y))\rightarrow \exists z \forall x Q(x,z)$$ $$\exists x \forall y P(x,y) \lor \exists z \forall x Q(x,z)$$ Then I am resolving variable conflict: x->t $$\exists x \forall y P(x,y)…
Elvin
  • 220
  • 1
  • 9
2
votes
4 answers

Implication (if I can observe that Q is true sometimes and false sometimes)

I got a question for implication, P implies Q is true when P is true, Q is true at the same time. P implies Q is false when P is true, but Q is false. My question is if P is true, but sometimes Q is true and sometimes is false, then, can I say the…
Vincent
  • 23