COMP 2711H: Lecture 2
Date: 2024-09-02 17:34:27
Reviewed:
Topic / Chapter: Predicate Logic and Peano's Axioms
summary
βQuestions
- Does predicate / logic have much thing to do with (3-)SAT?
- π¨βπ« No, that's more of an algorithm...
Notes
Rules of Inference
-
Other unnamed rules
- proof by contradiction
- informal "Rule of Equivalence"
"Trivial" ones
- conjunction
- disjunctive syllogism
- modus tollens application
- simplification
- addition
- syllogism - 2
- syllogism of OR
- reverse syllogism of OR
- reverse syllogism of OR
-
Proof
- theorem: assuming following conditions
- wants to prove:
- process
- // premise
- // rule of equivalence
- // premise
- // rule of syllogism 2,3
- // premise
- // rule of syllogism 4,5
- above proof: can be checked by machine!
- if it understands all symbols, etc.
- π¨βπ« above: a "formal, mathematical" proof
- and, we can now add a new rule
- theorem: assuming following conditions
Predicates and Quantifiers
-
Predicates
- Boolean statement w/ variable
- : a predicate if it becomes a prop. when is replaced by a value
- π¨βπ«in our UNIVERSE
- : a predicate if it becomes a prop. when is replaced by a value
- examples
- // false
- // true
- however, if if out "universe" is that of integer
- no solution for the above exists
- we can have multiple variables, too
- Boolean statement w/ variable
-
Quantifiers
- universal quantifier
- "forall (in universe) s.t. "
- existential quantifier
- "exists (at least one in the universe...) s.t. "
- example:
- if universe is within the : true
- alternatively:
- universal quantifier
-
Rules on
- relation
- βdistributive law
- π¨βπ« but not the following!!
- there can be a that satisfies "either" one, but not both
- e.g.
- one on the left: w/ stricter requirement
- also: following is wrong, for the same reason
- there can be a that only satisfies one predicate
- e.g.
- one on the left: w/ looser requirement here
- relation
Defining Natural Numbers
-
Natural numbers
- highschool definition:
- π¨βπ« not good! vague, what does the mean?
- solved by Peano, in 19th century
- Peano axioms
- 0 is a natural number
- rules below: exists as equality wasn't defined by then...
- for every natural number ,
- ...
- every natural number has a successor
-
- i.e. is a one-to-one
- if is a set s.t.
- βthen
- π¨βπ« basis of all mathematical induction
- 0 is a natural number
- example: I want to prove
- let be the set of all natural no. s.t.
- showing two things are sufficient:
- holds
- highschool definition: