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
7
votes
3 answers

Pinocchio logic test

The other day, I watched the YouTube video "Can you pass this logic test from Brazil?" by MindYourDecisions. We are told that Pinocchio always lies, and that Pinocchio says 'All my hats are green'. We are asked to find which of the following 5…
7
votes
5 answers

Implication Logic Truth Table Explained

The question that has bothered me for a while has been answered and closed here (Implication in mathematics - How can A imply B when A is False?) and probably many other posts. Although all the answers are accurate and correct in their own way of…
7
votes
2 answers

Peano Axioms and First-Order Logic

I've been reading Tao's Analysis 1 recently and I've learnt about the Peano Axioms. I believe I have a good understanding of the axioms and I have been able to complete the problems in the chapter. However, I am aware that Tao is adopting a rather…
ghost
  • 377
7
votes
2 answers

A nonsensical argument

I am reading An Introduction to Formal Logic by Peter Smith. I was checking if the following argument ( Question no-8, Exercise-1 ) is valid or not: All the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe. Some mome raths are slithy toves. Hence some…
Navneet
  • 519
  • 2
  • 11
7
votes
0 answers

A question about S4 modal system

I am reading Fitting and Mendelsohn's first-order modal logic. I have some questions about the $\textit{de re}$ and $\textit{de dicto}$ necessity. Assume that we are working with an S4 system, is $(\star)$ or $(\star\star)$ valid? $$\Box(\exists…
ferdinand
  • 632
7
votes
1 answer

Equivalence and Presupposition

This is a very basic question about the relationship between presupposition and implication. The question is as follows: Let $A$, $B$ and $C$ be three propositions and let $A\Leftrightarrow B$, do we have ($\star$)? $$\textrm{$A$ presupposes $C$ iff…
Ximei
  • 409
7
votes
0 answers

Nelson's contradiction in finitism

I have read up, in Shoenfield and elsewhere, on a lot of the details involved in Nelson's failed proof of the inconsistency of arithmetic. I understand the Kritchman-Raz proof; the proof of the Hilbert-Ackermann consistency theorem; what the rank…
Jori
  • 1,698
7
votes
1 answer

Two sentences with same consequences

I am not a logician, so this is just kind of curiosity. Suppose you have a axiomatic system (?) like ZFC. Take $X$ to be the set of possible sentences, and set $x \sim y$ whenever one can prove the other. Let $X'$ be the set $X$ modulo this…
7
votes
2 answers

Isn't proving $A$ iff $B$ iff $C$ by showing $A\to B$ and $B\to C$ and $C\to A$ circular?

Suppose you have $A$ iff $B$ iff $C$. If you assume $A$ to be true to prove $B$, $B$ to be true to prove $C$, and $C$ to be true to prove $A$, then doesn't that imply you've assumed $A$ to be true to prove $A$? I ask because of the method of proof…
7
votes
2 answers

Logical meaning of "vice versa"?

I was wondering what "vice versa" means using the language of logic? For example, If P is unbounded, D is infeasible, and vice versa. Does the vice versa part mean that "If D is infeasible, P is unbounded", "If D is unbounded, P is infeasible",…
Tim
  • 47,382
7
votes
1 answer

What is the difference between impredicativity and recursion?

I'm looking to know the difference between the concepts of impredicativity and recursion. For impredicativity, I've got this defintion from wikipedia: Something that is impredicative, in mathematics and logic, is a self-referencing definition. And…
7
votes
2 answers

What are the "strong" and "weak" in mathematics?

If $A→B$ is $A$ strong and $B$ weak? For instance, the "strong inequality" $5<6$ implies the "weak inequality" $5≤6$. Is there anything more to it than that? I've seen the terms "stronger/weaker condition" or "stronger/weaker tests" used a few…
Not Euler
  • 3,079
7
votes
1 answer

Is the formal semantics of first-order logic ambiguous?

When defining the semantics of propositional and particularly first-order logic, it has always made me uneasy when reading, for example: $$M \models A \lor B \quad\text{iff}\quad M \models A \text{ or } M \models B$$ Where does the “or” on the right…
7
votes
6 answers

Why does "guess and verify technique" not involve circular reasoning?

I know of several proofs from differential equations, game theory and dynamic programming which uses the "guess and verify technique". However, now when I think back, I'm not so sure why these proofs don't involve circular reasoning. Is it because…
7
votes
1 answer

Mathematical logic: negation completeness = maximality?

In his notes "Gödel without (too many) tears" Peter Smith (2014), defines negation completeness in the following way: A theory $T$ is negation complete if it formally decides every closed well-formed formulaof its language, i.e. for every…
user405159
  • 353
  • 2
  • 12