Predicate Logic Universal and Existential quantifiers

In summary, the professor is using a different format that most of what is found on the internet. This makes it difficult for students to understand predicate logic. The student is having difficulty understanding how to apply predicate logic. The student has found a proof by reductio ad absurdum.
  • #1
Mishada17
3
0
Hi, I'm taking an intro logic class and though I'm comfortable with most propositional logic, predicate logic is confusing me. I joined the forum to ask this particular question that I've been stuck on for a while. Any help would be appreciated - I'm having trouble finding information on the web since my teacher uses a different format that most of what I've seen elsewhere.

Homework Statement


∃x F(x) |− ~(∀x ~F(x))


Homework Equations



Lecture information may be found on these two pages:
http://people.cis.ksu.edu/~schmidt/301s11/Lectures/5natdedS.html
http://people.cis.ksu.edu/~schmidt/301s11/Lectures/6quantS.html

The Attempt at a Solution


1. ∃x F(x) premise
-----------------
2. a ∀x ~F(x) assumption - I think this is the right assumption because I want to ~it, right?
3. ~ F(a) ∀e 2
4. ∃a ~F(a) ∃i 3
-----------------
5. ∃x ~F(x) ∃e 1 2-4

... beyond here I have no idea. I think I need to find an _|_ but so far the closest I've come is ∃x~F(x) and ∃x F(x) and those apparently don't contradict because ~e won't work on them. :'(
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
premise one says something is F, call it a, so F(a) is true.

your assumption (the correct one) says nothing is F, so, in particular, a is not F, so ~F(a) is true.

now its just a matter of putting it in notation your teacher will like.
 
  • #3
I'm sorry, I still don't understand how to apply it.
 
  • #4
well, you are doing a proof by reductio ad absurdum. so you need to show that your assumption leads to a contradiction. the statement 'F(a) and ~F(a)' is a contradiction, so if that follows directly from your assumption (and premises), and you believe your premises to be true, then the only conclusion is that your assumption is false, which is what you want to show.

hope this helps
 
  • #5
It did, thank you. You were ten times more helpful than my teacher, who just said, "look at example 3..." Well, I figured it out and example 3 was no help, sir!

Here is my completed proof:
1. ∃x F(x) premise
----------------------
2. a F(a) assumption
---------------------------
3. ∀x ~F(x) assumption
4. ~ F(a) ∀e 3
5. _|_ ~e 2,4
---------------------------
6. ~(∀x ~F(x)) ~i 3-5
----------------------
7. ~(∀x ~F(x)) ∃e 1,2-6
 
  • #6
cheers
 

Related to Predicate Logic Universal and Existential quantifiers

1. What is the difference between universal and existential quantifiers in predicate logic?

The universal quantifier (∀) in predicate logic means "for all" and is used to express that a statement is true for every element in a given set. The existential quantifier (∃) means "there exists" and is used to express that at least one element in a given set satisfies a given condition.

2. How are universal and existential quantifiers represented in predicate logic?

Universal quantifiers are represented by the symbol ∀ and existential quantifiers are represented by the symbol ∃.

3. Can universal and existential quantifiers be used together in a statement?

Yes, a statement can contain both universal and existential quantifiers. For example, "∀x, there exists a y such that x + y = 10" means that for any number x, there exists a number y that when added to x, equals 10.

4. What is the difference between a universal and existential statement in predicate logic?

In a universal statement, the quantifier applies to all elements in a set, while in an existential statement, the quantifier only applies to at least one element in a set.

5. How can universal and existential quantifiers be used in real-life applications?

Universal and existential quantifiers are commonly used in computer science and mathematics to express general and specific statements about a given set of data. They can also be used in natural language processing and artificial intelligence to represent statements about the world.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
838
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
750
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
949
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
883
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
9K
  • Mechanics
Replies
15
Views
1K
Back
Top