Is the Russell's Paradox Resolved in Predicate Calculus?

In summary, predicate calculus is a formal system used in mathematical logic and computer science to express statements about objects and their relationships. Proof in predicate calculus is more complex and powerful than proof in propositional logic, and involves the use of quantifiers. Axioms and rules of inference are fundamental principles in proof construction, and proof by contradiction is a common technique used. Some common strategies for constructing proofs in predicate calculus include direct proof, proof by contradiction, mathematical induction, and proof by cases, all while using logical reasoning and applying axioms and rules of inference systematically.
  • #1
solakis1
422
0
Prove (formall
y) in predicate calculus :

$\neg\exists y\,\forall x\,(x\in y\leftrightarrow \neg x\in x)$.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
solakis said:
Prove (formall
y) in predicate calculus :

$\neg\exists y\,\forall x\,(x\in y\leftrightarrow \neg x\in x)$.

Please post the solution you have ready.
 
  • #3
MarkFL said:
Please post the solution you have ready.
\(\displaystyle \neg\exists y\forall x(x\in y\Longleftrightarrow\neg(x\in x))\)

Proof:

1) \(\displaystyle \exists y\forall x(x\in y\Longleftrightarrow\neg(x\in x))\)........Hypothesis for RAA

2)\(\displaystyle \forall x(x\in y\Longleftrightarrow\neg(x\in x))\).......Hypothesis for existential elimination (EE)

3)\(\displaystyle y\in y\Longleftrightarrow\neg(y\in y)\).........2,Universal elimination (UE)

4) \(\displaystyle y\in y\)..............hypothesis for RAA

5) \(\displaystyle y\in y\Longrightarrow\neg(y\in y)\)......... 3,elimination of double implication (<=>E)

6) \(\displaystyle \neg(y\in y)\).................4,5 M.Ponens

7) \(\displaystyle y\in y\wedge \neg(y\in y)\)............4,6 addition introduction (& I)

8) \(\displaystyle \neg(y\in y)\)...............4 to 7 RAA

9) \(\displaystyle \neg( y\in y)\Longrightarrow y\in y\)..........3,<=> E

10) \(\displaystyle y\in y\)................ 8,9 M.Ponens

11) \(\displaystyle A\wedge \neg A\)...............8,10 CONTRAD

12) \(\displaystyle A\wedge \neg A\)......1,2 to 11 EE

13) \(\displaystyle \neg\exists y\forall x(x\in y\Longleftrightarrow\neg(x\in x))\)..........1 to 12 RAA
 
Last edited by a moderator:

FAQ: Is the Russell's Paradox Resolved in Predicate Calculus?

What is predicate calculus?

Predicate calculus is a formal system used in mathematical logic and computer science to express statements about objects and their relationships. It is a type of mathematical language that allows us to precisely describe and reason about mathematical and logical concepts.

How is proof in predicate calculus different from proof in propositional logic?

Proof in predicate calculus is more complex and powerful than proof in propositional logic because it allows for reasoning about objects and their properties, rather than just simple truth values. Predicate calculus also involves the use of quantifiers, such as "for all" and "there exists", which are not present in propositional logic.

What is the role of axioms and rules of inference in proof in predicate calculus?

Axioms and rules of inference are fundamental principles that serve as the starting point for constructing proofs in predicate calculus. Axioms are statements that are taken to be true without proof, while rules of inference dictate how new statements can be derived from existing ones.

How is proof by contradiction used in predicate calculus?

Proof by contradiction is a common technique used in predicate calculus to prove the truth of a statement. It involves assuming the negation of the statement and then showing that this leads to a contradiction or impossible situation. This proves that the original statement must be true.

What are some common strategies for constructing proofs in predicate calculus?

Some common strategies for constructing proofs in predicate calculus include direct proof, proof by contradiction, mathematical induction, and proof by cases. It is also important to use logical reasoning and to carefully apply the axioms and rules of inference in a systematic way.

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
834
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top