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

Write sentence in logic

If it rains, he will be at home; otherwise he will go to the market or to school. Let $p$ be rains, $q$ be at home, $m$ market, $s$ school Is the correct statement $p \implies q$? But what about $\neg p \implies m \lor s$? Which one is correct…
ayylmao
  • 101
2
votes
1 answer

With a premise that $p \implies q$ how does this Fitch system proof "prove" that $\neg q \implies \neg p$?

I am having trouble getting a "feel" for Fitch system proofs. I was surprised at the resolution of this problem in the Stanford Logic class using their Fitch system engine. It seems trivially obvious that $(\phi \implies \psi) \models (\neg \psi…
MmmHmm
  • 231
2
votes
1 answer

Fitch System proof for $(\neg p \implies q) \implies ((\neg p \implies \neg q) \implies p)$ with no premises.

How to solve this problem using a Fitch System proof for $( \neg p \implies q) \implies ((\neg p \implies \neg q) \implies p)$ with no premises? I tried assuming $( \neg p \implies q) $ then assuming $ \neg p $ but where do I go from there to get…
MmmHmm
  • 231
2
votes
2 answers

Deduction Theorem Intuition

I am using the deduction theorem from this site https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deduction_theorem Can you write the word implies as such for the deduction theorem (Δ∪{A}⊢B)⊢(Δ⊢A→B)? Also, I am confused because isn't {A} a set? I thought this {A}…
W. G.
  • 1,766
2
votes
4 answers

Find a model M where $M \models(∀x)(∃y)R(x,y) ∧ ¬(∃y)(∀x)R(x,y)$

Find a model M where $M \models (∀x)(∃y)R(x,y) ∧ ¬(∃y)(∀x)R(x,y)$ I'm not sure about what does this sentence mean. I was thinking the first half part as for all $x$, there exists $y$ such that $x R y$.
Haley
  • 71
2
votes
1 answer

Predicates variable order in P(x,y)

Is the predicate P with two variables, x and y, x smaller than y , the same thing as the predicate P with two variable , y and x, does it stays x smaller than y or does y becomes smaller than x ? Thanks.
Maxime
  • 21
  • 2
2
votes
2 answers

Universal Quantification and Sets $\forall x \in Z \exists y \in Z(x *y = x + y)$

$\forall x \in Z \exists y \in Z(x *y = x + y)$ If I'm understanding this correctly this is FALSE.
lampShade
  • 1,053
2
votes
3 answers

Prove that a formula in propositional logic depends only on a subset of variables

I have the following equality in propositional logic: (p ∨ q) ∧ (r ∨ p) ∧ (¬q ∨ ¬r ∨ p) ≡ p and I want to prove it without using its thruth table. My intuition is that the equality holds because the result only depends on p: Whatever value q/r…
user399135
2
votes
1 answer

How to translate "No husbands are wives" with binary predicates $H(x,y)$ , $W(x,y)$?

How would you translate the sentence, "No husbands are wives," with these two binary predicates: $\quad H(x,y)$ is defined to mean "$x$ is the husband of $y$." $\quad W(x,y)$ is defined to mean "$x$ is the wife of $y$." There is no predicate $H(x)$…
Jenson
  • 21
2
votes
1 answer

Am I understanding the colons in Frege's Begriffsschrift correctly?

I understand, I think, the general notation for abbreviated arguments in Frege's Begriffsschrift, but I'm a little unclear on the use of one colon versus two, following the invocation of an omitted argument. In §6 Frege writes, in Terrell Bynum's…
2
votes
2 answers

Troubles with proving the following expression $((p \implies q) \implies p) \implies p$ using Fitch System

I having heavy difficulties with this exercise beacuse it doesn't have any premise. I can't get the result I want (which is posted on the title of the question) straight to the top level 1. p Assumption 2. (p => q) => p…
2
votes
2 answers

The "Axiom of choice" in proof of Skolem from equisatisfiability theorem

I do not understand the application of the "axiom of choice " in the proof of equisatisfiability of Skolem form. Can you help show me the understandable format in this case ? Here is the proof from wiki…
Keith
  • 165
2
votes
1 answer

mathematical logic: definition of a homomorphism, isomorphism and related notions

Here are some definitions that I found in some lecture notes about mathematical logic: Definition 1. Given two models M and M', an isomorphism of M into M' is a function h such that h is a homomorphism of M into M' and h is one-to-one. A…
user405159
  • 353
  • 2
  • 12
2
votes
1 answer

Write down a proof for $\bot\Rightarrow q$ in proposition calculus

I am given the hint in the question that I will need to use the axiom $(((s\Rightarrow \bot)\Rightarrow \bot)\Rightarrow s)$. The axioms I am using are $$(s\Rightarrow (t \Rightarrow s)) \\((s\Rightarrow(t\Rightarrow u))\Rightarrow((s\Rightarrow…
Spook
  • 4,918
2
votes
2 answers

Logic statements. Question from GRE math subject test

Suppose $A, B,$ and $C$ are statements such that $C$ is true if exactly one of $ A$ and $B$ is true. If $C$ is false which of the following statements must be true? A) if $A$ is true, then $B$ is false. B) if $A$ is false, then $B$ is false. C) if…
IrbidMath
  • 3,187
  • 12
  • 27