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
2 answers

Negation if statement

Let p be the statement: 'If n is an odd number then 4n-1 is a prime' Find the negation of p. My answer would intuitively be 'If n is an even number then 4n-1 is a prime' but I have the doubt that a possible answer might be 'If n is an odd number…
Eli
  • 33
2
votes
3 answers

Using a direct proof to show argumentative validity

Can anybody either verify or dispute the my proof for the following argument? Premise 1: (E • I) v (M •U) Premise 2: ~E Conclusion: ~(E v ~M) Proof: (1) Applying DeMorgan's Second Law to the Conclusion; The Negation of a Disjunction, it is the…
2
votes
1 answer

biconditionals and tautologies

Is a biconditional necessarily a tautology? For instance, in the proposition (K--->N) iff (N--->K), "iff" is a type of equivalence, correct? So, if a tautology is also an equivalence, then this statement would be tautologous, would it not?
2
votes
2 answers

Function that have values that we can't determine (in principle - not because they are to difficult to compute)

I know that in some cases one has to exhibit functions like $f\equiv1$ if some famous conjecture is true and $f\equiv0$ else. With this I don't have a problem, because I perceive this function as well-defined, since although at present we can't…
temo
  • 5,237
2
votes
3 answers

Proof $p \vdash q \Rightarrow p$

Firstly, how do I read it? Is below right? With braces $$p \vdash (q \Rightarrow p)$$ The given proof is: ${p}$, premise ${q}$, assumption $p$ by (1) // what??? ${q} \Rightarrow p$ by implication introduction with 2 and 2.1 QED... I can't…
Jiew Meng
  • 4,593
2
votes
1 answer

English to Predicate Logic (Imply and AND)

The question is: If Bob is happy, then all his friends are happy My attempt looks like: $happy(bob) \Rightarrow (\forall x(friend(x, bob) \wedge happy(x)))$ The answer is $happy(bob) \Rightarrow (\forall x(friend(x, bob)…
Jiew Meng
  • 4,593
2
votes
1 answer

Let $f_1,...,f_n$ be an enumeration of all computable functions in N to N. Prove $h(n)=f_n(n)$ is not calculable.

Let $f_1,...,f_n$ be an enumeration of all calculable functions in N to N. Prove $h(n)=f_n(n)$ is not calculable. I don't really know where to start here, any hint appreciated.
2
votes
4 answers

How could we prove that $(p \vee q) \wedge( \neg p \vee r )\rightarrow (q \vee r)$ is a tautology?

How could we prove that $(p \vee q) \wedge( \neg p \vee r )\rightarrow (q \vee r)$ is a tautology? I am more interested in the algebraic method. We can use all the rules of inferences except the Resolution.
Eric
  • 165
2
votes
0 answers

Hints/Tipps/Advices for beginning student of proof theory

Not an exact question really yet, but just already getting a picture about where/how I will probably find help, advices, hints etc. in the next weeks and months. In the following months I will be studying proof theory, following the book of Girard…
Ettore
  • 527
2
votes
1 answer

Does a conditional statement imply a universal quantifier?

To me, it seems like the following two statements are equivalent x ∈ Arbitrary set P(x)→ Q(x) = ∀x ∈ Arbitrary set (P(x)→ Q(x)) For example, if x ∈ all people, P(x) stands for "x is a man", and Q(x) stands for "x isn't a female", then ∀x(P(x)→…
2
votes
4 answers

Defining logical form of statement: Difference between "are both not" and "are not both"

Analyze the logical forms of the following statements: (a) Alice and Bob are not both in the room. (b) Alice and Bob are both not in the room. I don't feel the difference between both statements. My solution is: a)¬(A ∧ B) b)(¬A ∧ ¬B) Am i right?…
2
votes
3 answers

Prove or Disprove: $\exists y ∈ \mathbb{N}$ such that $\forall x ∈ \mathbb{N}, 2x ≤ y + 1$

Here's what I have done: I think it's false, so I set out to prove the negation. Which is: $$\forall y \in \mathbb{N}, \exists x \in \mathbb{N}; 2x > y + 1$$ I then let $y$ be an arbitrary natural number. After this, I do not know how to proceed.
William
  • 89
2
votes
2 answers

Negation of Implication

For all real numbers $x$, if $x^2\ge1$ then $x > 0$. Is the negation of the statement above is there exist real numbers x, x^2 greater than or equal to 1 and x < 0?
2
votes
2 answers

what is the least possible number of men who are married, have their own telephone, own their own car, and own their own house?

To solve this problem, I drew a graph shown below and tried to solve the problem using the graph. I found it very complicated, so I don't believe that I am on right track. What is the easy way to solve the problem? (I try to include the graph, but…
math
  • 273
2
votes
1 answer

Why does falsehood preservation imply non completeness

So according to wikipedia a set of connectives is complete if and only if it doesnt belong to one of the listed groups. One of the groups is , connectives that are falsehood preserving, that is,that assigning a value of false to all the variables…
Quality
  • 5,527