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
1
vote
1 answer

Given an L-structure, how do you define sets in first order logic?

Let $L = \{ R,c \}$; where $R$ is a binary predicate symbol and $c$ is a constant symbol, and let $\mathcal M$ be an $L$-structure such that $|\mathcal M| = \{ 1, 2, 3, 4 \}$; $R^{\mathcal M} = \{ <1,2>, <2,3>, <3,4>, <4,1> \}$; $c^{\mathcal M} =…
Emma L
  • 11
1
vote
0 answers

Proof within Hilbert system

I'm trying to prove a formula in the Hilbert system. First of all, I have a question whether a certain step is allowed. Provided that the theorem ⊢A→A has already been proven in the Hilbert system. Can I replace an occurence of the form A→A in…
Alwin
  • 11
1
vote
1 answer

Find to which $( \forall x)$ , each occurrence of x belongs to. (logic)

Find to which $( \forall x) $, each occurrence of x belongs to. $$ (\forall x)((\forall x)(\forall y)\ x < y \lor x > z ) \rightarrow (\forall y)\ y=x $$ Is it right that the third and fourth occurrence of x belongs to the second occurrence of $…
1
vote
4 answers

$A \Longrightarrow \tilde A$ is always false? Tautology problem?

$A \Longrightarrow \tilde A$ is always false? So here's what I did: I did the contrapositive $\tilde(\tilde A) = A \Longrightarrow \tilde A$ So by contrapositive, I also get $A$ implies $\tilde A$. I also did a truth table. But I don't get a…
Don Larynx
  • 4,703
1
vote
0 answers

Three valued logical problem simplification (or not?)

I have a mathematical/programming question. I have a big datafile (.mat-file) which contains sort of boolean data: it is a matrix of doubles that express the following data: x1 = 1, x2 = 0, x3 = 0, x4 = random(0,1), ...,xn = 1 x1 = 0, x2 = 0, x3 =…
1
vote
2 answers

Question about logic implications

If $X\implies Y$ and $X\implies Z$, does that mean that $Y\implies Z$? I think it does, but can anyone show this as a proof? Thanks
omega
  • 751
1
vote
1 answer

Sound and Complete

So I am in a introductory formal logic class, and my professor has asked us questions on our homework about "Sound and Complete rules of inference". Unfortunately, I am having a hard time finding out what he means by this or where to find an…
Valentino
  • 1,334
1
vote
1 answer

What is the name of this basic law of logic?

Given any logical formulas $\alpha, \beta, \gamma$. Then: $$ (\alpha \lor \beta) \land (\neg \beta \lor \gamma) \models (\alpha \lor \gamma) $$ Unlike for Modus Ponens and the chain rule, we were not given a name for this law.
mafu
  • 537
1
vote
3 answers

$x \vee y \Rightarrow z \vee t$ - logic

I show that $x \Rightarrow z$ and $y \Rightarrow t$ are true. Is $x \vee y \Rightarrow z \vee t$ then true?
user145
  • 127
1
vote
0 answers

Validity of three syllogisms with venn diagram

me and my study group are struggling with a "how to proof syllogism conclusions" approach. We got three syllogisms which look like the following: We know for a fact that syllogism #1 and #3 are false. Syllogism #2 is true. This is how we solved…
Jack
  • 111
1
vote
1 answer

Is it always possible to decide if either a statement or its negation is provable in a given axiomatic system?

The question is essentially in the title. Given an axiomatic system of unspecified power (it could be set theory or it could be propositional logic) and a statement A, can I always decide if either A or its negation is provable in the axiomatic…
1
vote
3 answers

Finding equivalent formulas

The question I have on my homework is "Find a formula that contains no connective other than ¬ and v which is equivalent to ((p→q)→s)." I drew out the truth table for the given formula but have no idea where to even start to construct an equivalent…
release
  • 11
1
vote
1 answer

Existential Logical equivalence

Can anyone help my to understand how to find a model for show that this is not an Logical Equivalence? i have no idea of which kind of dominion i've to use. really thanks to everyone from spain
1
vote
2 answers

Replacement of sentence symbols by $0$-place connectives

Suppose we add $0$-place connectives $\top, \bot$ to our language. For each well-formed formula wff $, \phi$ and sentence symbol, $A,$ let $\phi^{A}_{\top}$ be the wff obtained from $\phi$ by replacing $A$ with $\top.$ Similarly for…
1
vote
1 answer

Metaproving Question.

Prove that $ \vdash ((A \rightarrow B) \rightarrow A) \rightarrow A $ I want to make sure my answer is right as the textbook has no solutions. I am using Equational Proof. The textbook is "Mathematical Logic" For Tourlakis. My answer : $$ ((A…