Questions tagged [proof]
For questions about the correctness of a proof or the nature of proofs in general.
322
questions
0
votes
1
answer
236
views
Classification of deductive reasoning types
Please, could you help me make sense of/classify types of deductive reasoning?
When studying mathematical logical, I have noticed there is this Hilbert's axiomatic system (Hilbert calculus) with its ...
- 355
0
votes
1
answer
123
views
Predicate Logic Proof Help! ∃xAx ∨ ∃yFy , ∀x(Ax → Fx) |= ∃xFx [closed]
I am unable to prove it :(
I think I need to assume - ∃xFx but what follows later on?
user46149
0
votes
0
answers
119
views
fitch arrow proof
using the FITCH program and the FITCH derivation rules you should make a proof or derivation of C7 from P5 through P11.
P5: ∀x∀y(StrongPref(x,y)→ ¬StrongPref(y,x))
P6: ∀x∀y∀z((StrongPref(x,y)∧...
- 1
-1
votes
1
answer
95
views
How would I create a proof In SL
H
Therefore,
S ⇒(B ⇒H)
How would I create a proof in SL which shows the following argument is valid in SL.
- 1
0
votes
1
answer
572
views
Complete a formal proof of ~(~A&~B) from A in as few lines as possible
Prove ~(~A&~B) from A in as few lines as possible.
~ = negation
& = conjunction
v = disjunction
| = line in a subproof
Here's what I have:
A - Premise
|~A - Assume
|~B ...
- 1
0
votes
3
answers
183
views
In what contexts or disciplines does "One may assume X" imply "One may ignore the possibility of any statement contrary to X being true"?
In computer programming, it has become fashionable for compilers (processors of computer language) to apply the following form of reasoning:
A language standard would permit a compiler to assume that ...
- 248
0
votes
1
answer
352
views
How do I prove :((A ⊃ B) ⊃ C) ⊃ (B ⊃ C)?
How do I prove, :((A ⊃ B) ⊃ C) ⊃ (B ⊃ C), using symbolic logic derivations where ⊃ represents a conditional i.e. A ⊃ B = A implies B?
The first line of my derivations is the assumption, (A ⊃ B) ⊃ C)....
8
votes
2
answers
245
views
How do proofs about logic fit into a logical framework?
I'm learning logic from Michael O'Leary's A First Course in Mathematical Logic and Set Theory. In chapter 1 he carefully explains the meaning of logical implication (p ⊨ q), logical inference (p ⟹ q), ...
- 351
1
vote
1
answer
234
views
Proving A ⊨ B iff ⊨A → B
Let A and B represent arbitrary formulas.
Also let 1 ≡ True and 0 ≡ False
Prove that A ⊨ B iff ⊨A → B
For my proof, I break down the biconditional into two conditionals and prove each conditional.
...
- 297
4
votes
2
answers
600
views
How to show (in a hand waving manner) that the Godel sentence is true
I have been reading Graham Priest's The Logic of Paradox, and there is a section where he tried to show that our informal proof argument (in Priest's terminology, naive proof procedure) is more ...
2
votes
2
answers
1k
views
I could prove: Solipsism is wrong. Is my argument acceptable?
Solipsism is the idea that one cannot be sure of anyone's existence but only themself. I think that one can assume this idea to be right and then prove that this is wrong. This self-inconsistency ...
0
votes
0
answers
69
views
why are ∀x(P(x)→ ∃y(Q(y)∧R(x,y))) and ∃y(Q(y)∧∀x(P(x)→(R(x,y))) not logically equivalent?
been sitting here for hours and still can't figure this out.
is the order of ∀x and ∃y important in this case?
all I can think of now is "all P is R of some Q", but I don't think this is right.
-2
votes
1
answer
598
views
Language, Proof and Logic Exercise 14.13 (Fitch)
Having trouble proving this. I know how to prove the first conjunct of the conclusion, but not the second one. Picture shown is the attempt proof of the second conjunct (rules haven't been added yet). ...
-1
votes
1
answer
873
views
Language, Proof, and Logic 14.11 Fitch Proof
Been stuck on this question for awhile now and I just don't know how to get Cube(x) so that I can use ^ intro with Cube(x) and ∀y (Cube(y) → y = a) and then use ∃ intro to get the conclusion. This is ...
- 15
0
votes
2
answers
1k
views
Fitch Proof Exercise 6.20
I am working on a proof and am stuck on a step. I am not sure why I cannot assume the negation of B. Is it not allowed or am I missing something? Thank you]1
- 39
-1
votes
4
answers
578
views
Language Proof & Logic 8.31 Fitch Proof
Been working on this one question for the past hours and I can't ever seem to get the last step working. Any help would be appreciated!
- 15
15
votes
8
answers
7k
views
Does every truth have to be provable based on evidence?
I know the answer is "no" in general due to Gödel's Theory of Incompleteness, but I mean this question in a more real-world sense (i.e. scientific sense). In other words, I am talking about empirical ...
- 271
0
votes
1
answer
228
views
What kinds of proofs can be given for axioms, e.g. the modal axiom S5?
From John Bigelow and Robert Pargetter's book, titled, 'Science and Necessity', they assert the following:
. . . . The resulting system, S5, contains all the theorems of S4 and all the theorems of ...
- 146
1
vote
1
answer
104
views
Is a tree proof or natural deduction a semantic method of proof?
Peter Schroeder-Heister writes in an article on "Proof-Theoretic Semantics" the following:
Proof-theoretic semantics is inherently inferential, as it is inferential activity which manifests itself ...
- 19.2k
0
votes
1
answer
703
views
De Morgan's Law Formal Proof [duplicate]
Does anyone know how to do this without the use of addition rules? We have not covered that in class, and all the info I can find online suggests that as a solution. Thanks]1
- 39
4
votes
1
answer
413
views
Proof Using Model Universe
Suppose I am trying to prove the following argument
(∀x)(Cx → Dx), (∀x)(Ex → ~Dx), /∴ (∀x)(Ex → ~Cx)
Now, let's also assume that I don't know if this argument is valid or not. Because of this, I try ...
- 297
12
votes
9
answers
12k
views
How to prove (A v B), (A → C), (B → D) therefore (C v D)
Obviously since A → C and B → D then if A v B one of C or D must be true.
My only idea is v must be introduced, but how would I use subproofs to show one of A /\ C or B /\ D is never false if A v B?
- 137
0
votes
2
answers
101
views
What are some key differences between an argument in logic and a theory in mathematics?
Both are composed from rules and assumptions which enable us to deduce other inevitable truths that results from these rules and assumptions, right?
- 355
1
vote
2
answers
280
views
Help with an existential natural deduction proof
From the assumption
∃x∃y R(x, y)
I need to derive the conclusion
∃y∃x R(x, y)
From the comments: I tried to use Existential Elimination but I can't figure out how to do it properly.
0
votes
1
answer
46
views
How does one go about this natural deduction proof?
From no assumptions derive the conclusion
∃x t = x
(where t can be any term).
0
votes
1
answer
463
views
Are there rules for the following in the Open Logic Project's proof checker?
I'm using http://proofs.openlogicproject.org/ but can't find out what the translation of the rules are. I'm new at this, so when I try to make proofs, I know what I want the justification to be (which ...
- 21
2
votes
1
answer
361
views
Fitch Proof - Arrow's logic of preferences
I've been stumped on this one question in particular for several days now and I'm hoping to get some help on where I'm going wrong.
Given the following premises:
∀x∀y(StrongPref(x,y)→ ¬StrongPref(y,...
- 29
-3
votes
1
answer
294
views
Fitch Arrow Proofs [closed]
Using the FITCH program and the FITCH derivation rules you should make a proof or derivation of C10 from P5 through P11.
P5: ∀x∀y(StrongPref(x,y)→ ¬StrongPref(y,x))
P6: ∀x∀y∀z((StrongPref(x,y)∧...
- 11
2
votes
1
answer
602
views
Proof Tree to Fitch Proof
I was wondering if anyone could help me on a proof I've been working on:
I was able to check that it is valid with a proof tree generator (prooftools):
However, I still haven't figured out the proof....
0
votes
2
answers
98
views
Fitch Question Please Help Me [closed]
I'm having trouble understanding writing out a proof. The proof I'm trying to work with is :
How do I reach this goal? Which rules do I use and with which support steps to each rule (proofs to prove ...
user39869
1
vote
2
answers
125
views
Fitch Questions Please Help Me
I'm having trouble understanding writing out a proof. The proof I'm trying to work with is :
How do I reach this goal? Which rules do I use and with which support steps to each rule (proofs to prove ...
user39869
-1
votes
2
answers
287
views
Fitch Proof Help
I'm having some trouble solving this proof in Fitch. How do the universals switch place from the premise to the goal? There is no negation in the goal so negation introduction is not the way to go, I ...
2
votes
3
answers
1k
views
How is Wittgenstein’s “notorious paragraph” about the Gödel's Theorem not obviously correct?
Timm Lampert quotes from Wittgenstein's "notorious paragraph" (§8 of Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics, Appendix 3) in http://wab.uib.no/agora/tools/alws/collection-6-issue-1-article-...
- 57
0
votes
2
answers
299
views
Fitch Question Help
I'm having trouble understanding quantifiers in proofs. The proof I'm working with is :
¬∀x Tet(x) -- Premise
¬∀x (Tet(x) ∧ Medium(x)) -- Goal
How do I reach this goal and also get to the goal ...
2
votes
1
answer
82
views
How to find a stance towards a controversial topic
When is a stance towards a topic "proven"?
To create this example I will take the anti vax topic.
My first impulse is:
anti vax people are stupid. They ignore basic science.
I myself would (...
- 121
1
vote
2
answers
141
views
Structure of an if and only if proof
I am trying to get this proof to work out and so far I feel like I have the first part right but I'm stuck on how to get the A→B part.
- 37
2
votes
2
answers
254
views
Solving a proof in which the goal is the negation of a variable in Fitch
I'm working on an assignment and I'm stuck on this proof. I feel like I'm on the right track but I can't find the way to prove the goal.
A ^ B
(A ^ ~C) --> ~D
A -> ~C
(B ^ E) --> (C v D)
~E
I ...
1
vote
3
answers
650
views
Fitch Proof Question
I'm having trouble with a proof and I'm not sure if it's valid or not. If it appears to be invalid, we are supposed to assign names to the letters in the proof and check it in a World, but when I do ...
0
votes
1
answer
268
views
Using predicate logic, how to solve symmetric and anti reflexive
The networks is: A->B->C->D
The channels used by the network are: lo, med, hi
h-hi, l-lo, m-med
i) A network uses one, and only one channel.
ii) Networks within close proximity cannot both use the ...
- 47
3
votes
1
answer
426
views
How to Prove P(a) → ∀x(P(x) ∨ ¬(x = a)) using Natural Deduction
How would a formal Fitch proof look like.
I am given P(a) → ∀x(P(x) ∨ ¬(x = a)) to prove using Natural Deduction of predicate logic.
I am confused on how to proceed with the proof.
Please advice me ...
- 47
1
vote
2
answers
245
views
Logical equivalence proofs
Trying to master logical equivalence proofs out of a textbook is proving to be difficult. I’m hung up on these four problems. I can make some progress, but usually get stuck towards the very end. Any ...
- 127
1
vote
3
answers
775
views
Is anything not proven impossible therefore possible?
Is it a truism that, except for that which is proven impossible, everything is or must be considered possible? If so, why? It seems to me to be an argument from ignorance to say that just because we ...
- 39
2
votes
1
answer
448
views
How does a truth tree provide positive and negative effect tests for implication?
I'm trying to prove that the truth-tree method can be used to give a positive effect test for implication, and a negative effect test for non-implication. I've been given the fact that The truth-tree ...
- 21
2
votes
1
answer
108
views
How to prove or disprove validity of ◻◻p → ◻p in the frame (Q,<) of the rational numbers with the usual less-than ordering?
I was wondering if someone can perhaps help with this proving. I am not sure how to handle a temporal frame that is not a set of only natural numbers. Any suggestions?
Thank you.
- 143
0
votes
2
answers
82
views
Proof with conditional introduction
Below is a screen-cap of part of a video where a proof using conditional introduction is shown, which is proving under certain assumptions that given A is true, then the adjacent sentence is also true....
- 225
1
vote
2
answers
94
views
I need some help determining the validity of the following argument
“I got the highest grade on the last test and I have perfect attendance. If I get a cold, then I miss at least one class. I came down with a cold. Therefore, if I missed at least one class, then I ...
- 59
5
votes
5
answers
462
views
Is an argument in natural language as logically valid as in formal logic?
Is a natural language philosophical argument which is argued strictly from first principles widely considered equally as valid as a proof written in formal logic?
- 225
2
votes
2
answers
243
views
Prove or disprove ~◇◻p → ◇◇~p in system K
How to start with the following proof? Any help would be appreciated.
I have tried by assuming the left side is true, however, I get confused with the negation.
~◇◻p → ◇◇~p
- 143
3
votes
3
answers
435
views
Do picture proofs of the Pythagorean theorem make it empirical?
As I understand it, the Pythagorean Theorem, which defines the metric for Euclidean space, is said to be strictly mathematical in the sense that it is derived from a set of purely theoretical axioms (...
2
votes
1
answer
953
views
De Morgan for Quantifiers Formal Proof: ∀∃-intro and -elim Questions
I have a problem reading existing question's answers. I've successfully encoded the proof of one of De Morgan's Laws, ¬∃x P(x) → ∀x ¬P(x), for Quantifiers formally via cubicaltt type-checker via Curry-...
