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

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the process of renaming bound variables in predicate logic, particularly in relation to Theorem 2.5.6. It explains that when dealing with a formula containing both free and bound variables, one can select a fresh variable name to replace a bound variable, ensuring it does not conflict with free variables. An example illustrates this process, demonstrating how to apply the theorem to achieve an equivalent formula by renaming bound variables. The key takeaway is that renaming bound variables simplifies the formula and reduces variable overlap. This method is essential for maintaining logical equivalence 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: 145
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...
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
Back
Top