About the existence of Hamel basis for vector spaces

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
32 replies · 8K views
A well-formed formula (wff) is (syntactically) provable if and only if it is valid. This defines the relation between (Semantic) truth and (Syntactic) provability. I'm not aware of how the term 'hold' is used, by there are wff's in Sentence Logic that are contingent. And, yes, every provable statement in FOL os Sentence Logic is a Tautology; true in every model.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
WWGD said:
A well-formed formula (wff) is (syntactically) provable if and only if it is valid. This defines the relation between (Semantic) truth and (Syntactic) provability. I'm not aware of how the term 'hold' is used, by there are wff's in Sentence Logic that are contingent. And, yes, every provable statement in FOL or Sentence Logic is a Tautology; true in every model.
Ok, a well-formed formula (wff) is (syntactically) provable if and only if it is valid since we're assuming a sound and (semantically) complete logic system (like FOL or Sentential (or propositional) logic are).

What does it mean that in Sentential logic there are contingent wffs ?
 
cianfa72 said:
Ok, a well-formed formula (wff) is (syntactically) provable if and only if it is valid since we're assuming a sound and (semantically) complete logic system (like FOL or Sentential (or propositional) logic are).

What does it mean that in Sentential logic there are contingent wffs ?
Statements that aren't tautologies, like ##A \rightarrow B ##, which is not true when A is true and B is false.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cianfa72