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

Is second order logic compact and/or decidable?

Is second order logic compact and/or decidable? Wikipedia says Gödel's...compactness theorem, which hold[s] for first-order logic, carr[ies] over to second-order logic with Henkin semantics. This is makes it sound like second-order logic is…
2
votes
3 answers

Is the following argument valid in intuitionistic first-order logic?

Let $P$ be a predicate, $R$ be a binary relation and $a, b, c$ be three individuals. We have the following premises: $P(a)$ $\neg P(c)$ $R(a, b)$ $R(b, c)$ The statement $\exists x \exists y (R(x,y) \land P(x) \land \neg P(y))$ is a consequence of…
user107952
  • 20,508
2
votes
1 answer

Why is modus ponens a q-implication?

Modus ponens is stated $$((P \implies Q) \land P) \implies Q$$ But isn't $(P \implies Q) = (\lnot P \lor Q)$? Then we get $((P \implies Q) \land P) \implies Q$ $= (\lnot P \lor Q) \land P$ $= (\lnot P \land P) \lor (P \land Q)$ $= \text{False} \lor…
2
votes
3 answers

Negation Of A Compound Statement

How can I write the negation of the following compound statements with "QUANTIFIERS" Actually it is easy to do but I feel like I'm missing some logic and cant understand fully. 1) Every student that solves all given questions will get a passing…
Scott
  • 103
2
votes
1 answer

Finite models which break the theorem `every injective map is surjective'

Consider the first order theory consisting of a single function $f$, and consider the theorem $$ (\forall x,y: f(x) = f(y) \Rightarrow x = y) \Rightarrow (\forall x \exists y: f(y) = x) $$ which, translated into english, says that if $f$ is…
Jacob Denson
  • 2,129
2
votes
1 answer

How to simplify complex logic connectives? (DNF)

For this logic connective sentence: $(P \wedge Q \wedge R) \vee (P \wedge Q \wedge \neg R) \vee (\neg P \wedge Q \wedge R) \vee (\neg P \wedge \neg Q \wedge R)$ How can I simplify the above (or find its equivalent) to: $(P \wedge Q) \vee (\neg P…
2
votes
1 answer

What mistake am I making within this logic resolution problem?

I'm given the following statements: $$M_1\implies O$$$$\neg M_1 \implies Z$$$$(O\lor Z)\implies H$$$$H\implies M_2$$ Then the question is, can you prove whether H is true? Followed up by, now answer the same question via logical resolution. My…
Mitchell Faas
  • 1,588
  • 13
  • 26
2
votes
2 answers

weird natural deduction question

There are these two questions that my professor posted, and they absolutely stumped me: $ \vdash (\exists x. \bot) \implies P $ and $(\exists x. \top) \vdash (\forall x. \bot ) \implies P$. What do I even do with the $(\exists x. \bot)$ part? It…
2
votes
1 answer

If every assignment that models $F$ also models $G$, does it mean that $F=G$?

$G$ and $F$ are formulas, If every assignment that models $G$ also models $F$, does it mean that $F=G$? The question may be silly, but I'm not sure if there's some obscure scenario where $F\neq G$.
Red Banana
  • 23,956
  • 20
  • 91
  • 192
2
votes
1 answer

Quantified statements and rules of inference

I'm having problems proving the following. I have two hypothesis: $\forall x(P(x) \vee Q(x))$ and $\forall x((\neg P(x) \wedge Q(x)) \rightarrow R(x))$ and the conclusion is $\forall x(\neg R(x) \rightarrow P(x))$ where the domain is all the…
Jenjen
  • 29
  • 4
2
votes
2 answers

Is $((A\to B)\to B)\to A$ a tautology?

I'm really new to logic and I'm wondering whether the formula above is a tautology. I know that a tautology is a statement that's always true. I'm stuck.
2
votes
1 answer

How does PA interpret the axiom of pairing?

$PA$ and $ZFC-Infinity$ are mutually interpretable, meaning that a model of one is a model of the other and every axiom and theorem can be translated to the other system. One of the $ZFC - Infinity$ axioms is the axiom of pairing, which states that…
2
votes
3 answers

Why does adding a negative number to a positive number reduce the original positive number?

There's a question over on stack overflow about adding negative numbers to a negative number. The question surrounds why 10 - -5 is equal to 5. I'm very happy that the result is 5, but why is it 5 and not 15. It is philosophical or is there a…
Rob White
  • 123
2
votes
1 answer

When is a given relation transitive?

Okay I am having some difficulties understanding whether a relation is transitive. For example, we have the set $R=\{1,2,3,4\}$. How can $R_1=\{(3,4)\}$ be transitive when something like $R_2=\{(1,1),(1,2),(2,1)\}$ is not transitive? I know that a…
user420309
2
votes
1 answer

Logic - finding most general statement

Let A and B be sets. For each statement below, please write down the most general statements you can make about A and B. Make sure you justify your answer. a. A ∪ B = A? b. A ∩ B = A? c. A ∪ B = A ∩ B? d. A − B = A? e. A − B = B − A? Please Correct…
Node.JS
  • 1,119