A question on "Change of bound variables" Theorem (predicate logic)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of Theorem 2.5.6 in predicate logic, specifically regarding the renaming of bound variables within formulas. The participants clarify that when dealing with a formula $\varphi$, one must identify free variables (FV) and bound variables (BV), and ensure that renamed bound variables do not conflict with free variables. An example illustrates the process of renaming a bound variable $x$ to $y$ in the formula $\psi$, demonstrating that the equivalence $\models(\forall x\exists u\,f(x)=g(u,v)) \leftrightarrow (\forall y\exists u\,f(y)=g(u,v))$ holds true. This method simplifies the formula by eliminating variable overlap.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of predicate logic and its notation
  • Familiarity with the concepts of free and bound variables
  • Knowledge of Theorem 2.5.6 in predicate logic
  • Ability to manipulate logical formulas and equivalences
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of Theorem 2.5.6 in various logical contexts
  • Explore examples of variable renaming in more complex logical formulas
  • Learn about the role of fresh variable names in logical proofs
  • Investigate common pitfalls in handling free and bound variables in predicate logic
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, logicians, and anyone studying formal logic who seeks to deepen their understanding of variable management in predicate logic.

Mathelogician
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Hi all;
I need some clarification in red part; in how it is deduced from the theorem 2.5.6!
I know how the blue is deduced from the theorem but don't even know how to get blue form red in practice!(No algorithm is suggested...)
Anyway, any explanation is thanked...
Regards.
 

Attachments

  • Q1.png
    Q1.png
    20.5 KB · Views: 164
Physics news on Phys.org
Given a formula $\varphi$, we have two sets of variables: those that occur free in $\varphi$ and those that occur bound in $\varphi$. These two sets may have a nonempty intersection. We cannot do anything with free variables, but we can rename bound ones. So, for each bound variable $x$ select a new name that does not occur free and is free for $x$ and replace the variable with this name. It is often easier to select a completely new (called "fresh") variable name that does not occur in the original formula.

For example, let $\psi$ be \[x=0\lor\forall x\exists u\,f(x)=g(u,v)\] Then $FV(\psi)=\{x,v\}$ and $BV(\psi)=\{x,u\}$, so $FV(\psi)\cap BV(\psi)=\{x\}$. We would like to rename the bound $x$ by applying Theorem 2.5.6 to the right disjunct of $\psi$, i.e., to $\forall x\,\varphi[x/z]$ where $\varphi$ is $\exists u\,f(z)=g(u,v)$. We choose a new name for $x$, e.g., $y$, which is different from all variables in $\psi$. Then $x,y$ are free for $z$ in $\varphi$ and $x,y\notin FV(\varphi)$. Therefore, we can apply Theorem 2.5.6 to get $\models \forall x\,\varphi[x/z] \leftrightarrow \forall y\,\varphi[y/z]$, i.e., \[\models(\forall x\exists u\,f(x)=g(u,v)) \leftrightarrow (\forall y\exists u\,f(y)=g(u,v))\tag{*}\]By replacing the left-hand side of (*) with the right-hand side in $\psi$, we get an equivalent formula $x=0\lor\forall y\exists u\,f(y)=g(u,v)$.

It probably takes longer to read than to understand this. The idea is simple: choose a fresh variable name and replace a bound variable with this new name; you'll get an equivalent formula. If the old bound variable also occurred free, then you have one less variable that occurred both free and bound.
 
Perfect!
As always...
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
22K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
8K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K