home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!newsflash.concordia.ca!mizar.cc.umanitoba.ca!access.usask.ca!dvinci!choy
- From: choy@dvinci.USask.Ca (Henry Choy)
- Newsgroups: sci.logic
- Subject: Propositional calc question
- Date: 21 Jan 1993 22:34:18 GMT
- Organization: University of Saskatchewan
- Lines: 49
- Message-ID: <1jn8daINNhrq@access.usask.ca>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: dvinci.usask.ca
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
-
-
- I'm reading "Mathematical Logic" by S.W.P. Steen and I don't get
- the proof (if it is a proof) on how the composition building
- scheme on p. 42 is reversible. Can anyone tell me what's going on?
-
- I'm looking at a section on the classical propositional calculus,
- called Pc. There's a negation symbol (Noo of type oo), a disjunction
- symbol (Dooo), a variable (po), a generating sign (apostrophe), and
- the parentheses. One of the proof rules is the composition building
- rule:
-
- DNaw DNbw
- ----------
- DNDabw
-
- The rest of the proof rules:
-
- DDDxaby
- There is a remodelling rule: -------
- DDDxbay
-
- There are 2 other building rules:
-
- x
- dilution: ---
- Dax
- Daw
- double negation: -----
- DNNaw
-
- Steen says one of the properties of the composition rule is
- reversibility. That is, from DNDabw constructive proofs can be
- found for DNaw and DNbw. The justification given for finding a
- constructive proof of DNaw is to rebuild the proof for DNDabw.
- I'm not sure, but it seems that Steen is telling how to prove
- DNaw, and there's only an indirect relation to DNDabw.
-
- --
-
- Henry Choy
- choy@cs.usask.ca
-
- What rolls down stairs alone or in pairs This has been brought to
- Rolls over your neighbor's dog? you by the numbers 4
- What's great for a snack and fits on your back? and 9 and the letter P.
- It's Log, Log, Log! -- "The Log Song", from -- Big Bird
- Ren & Stimpy
-
- Math is tough! -- Barbie
-