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

Determine whether the given pair of statements are contrary, contradictory, or neither.

Consider the following pair of statements: All multiples of three are odd / Some multiples of three are odd. No triangle has an interior angle sum of zero degrees / Some triangle has an interior angle sum of zero degrees. Some dense sets are not…
2
votes
0 answers

is 2nd criterion of inference satisfied for the restrictions on rules governing quantifiers

these two criteria are mentioned in patrick suppes book- intro to logic. then to account for criterion 1 , some rules of restrictions on quantifiers are given. But about criterion 2, how do we know these rules are enough ?
Arjun
  • 159
2
votes
2 answers

clarification of a logic proof

I am a bit confused on what this question is asking me to prove: Prove $$ \exists z\forall x\in\mathbb{R}^{+}[\exists y(y - x = y/x)\leftrightarrow x \neq z] $$ Am I asked to prove that there exists a z where the bi-conditional statement is true?…
Stefan G.
  • 303
2
votes
2 answers

Logical Implication Question

$A: \text{Humans are at most 12 feet tall}$ $B: \text{Humans are at most 9 feet tall}$ Neither implies the other. A contradicts B and B contradicts A. Am I correct?
akuryo
  • 53
2
votes
1 answer

Can the empty theory (in the language of Peano arithmetic) imply anything?

How can a theory, $T$ (a set of sentences in $L_{PA}$) which is empty imply something? Is it stated and assumed trivially that it implies a sentence such as $\phi(x): \forall x : x=x$ is implied by $T$. I don't see how this is the case. Thanks in…
2
votes
1 answer

Löwenheim-Skolem in an extension of first order logic

I'm trying to show that the Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem holds in $\mathscr{L}_{Q_{0}}$, which we have defined as an extension of FoL with the following added properties: If $\varphi$ is a formula, then so is $Q_{0} x\varphi$ $\mathcal{A},h \models…
swit
  • 143
2
votes
1 answer

Axiomatic set theory: definitions.

In his book axiomatic set theory, Supped writes: An equivalence P introducing a new $n$-place operation symbol O is a proper definition if and only if P is of the form $O(v_1, v_2, v_3, \dots, v_n) = w\iff Q$ Where $v_1,v_2,v_3,\dots,v_n$ are…
2
votes
1 answer

Recursively enumerable sets and omega consistency

I have a question about a passage in Enderton's "A Mathematical Introduction to Logic", p. 241. He writes that if some formula $\exists v \rho$ defines a recursively enumerable set $Q$ in $\mathfrak{N}$, then it cannot represent $Q$ in $\text{Cn }…
user65526
  • 1,373
2
votes
1 answer

Bound variable in a formula

Let $S$ be an arbitrary set of symbols, $x$ variable and $\Phi$ $S$-formula. Assume that $x$ occurs as bound variable in $\Phi$. I want to show: There exist strings $\zeta_1, \zeta_2$ and $S$-formulas $\Psi_1, \Psi_2$ so that: x does not occur in…
xxx
  • 645
2
votes
1 answer

Assumptions, Axioms and Premises

The following attempt of mine at defining these terms, reflects my current understanding of them: Assumption: $\quad$ A statement accepted as true without proof being required. Axiom: $\quad$ A statement deemed by a system of formal logic to be…
memexor
  • 139
2
votes
1 answer

Enderton's logic book about completeness theorem

In page 141 of A Mathematical Introduction to Logic, Enderton simply writes, STEP 6: Restrict the structure $\mathfrak{A}/E$ to the original language. This restriction of $\mathfrak{A}/E$ satisfies every member of $\Gamma$ with $h \circ…
fbg
  • 861
2
votes
3 answers

Why $\bar{A}A+\bar{A}B\Rightarrow B$?

I was reading the following from a book of probability theory: A contradiction $\bar{A}A$ implies all propositions, true and false. (Given any two propostions $A$ and $B$, we have $A\Rightarrow(A+B)$, therefore…
xzhu
  • 4,193
2
votes
4 answers

Can We Say 'There Exists an Element' Without saying 'This One'?

The set $\mathbb R$ is uncountable $-$ a fact I believe is independent of the Axiom of Choice. Even still, only countably many of these elements can be explicitly described. In order to specify the decimal expansion of a real number $0. a_1 a_2…
Daron
  • 10,300
2
votes
2 answers

How to correctly draw logic formation trees?

I had an exam on Logic and came across a question which asked me to draw the logic formation tree for the following: $$\exists xP(x,x) \lor Q(x) \land \neg \forall y R(x) \to x = y$$ The formula was given exactly like this with no bracketing so my…
Nubcake
  • 426
  • 1
  • 6
  • 17
2
votes
0 answers

Structure for first order language

Suppose our first order language has two binary function symbols $f,g$ and a constant symbol $c$. Let the structure $\mu$ be defined as $|\mu|=\{ 0,1,2,3 \}$, $f^{\mu}$ is addition modulo $4$, $g^{\mu}$ is multiplication modulo $4$, and $c^{\mu}=3$.…
Idonknow
  • 15,643