Difference between propositional language and set of all formulas

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the definition of a propositional language ##\mathcal{F}## as presented in Rautenberg's book on mathematical logic. It establishes that ##S## represents an arbitrary set of strings that satisfies two specific properties: the inclusion of propositional variables ##p_1, p_2, \ldots## and the closure under binary connectives. ##\mathcal{F}## is defined as the smallest set containing these properties, achieved through the intersection of all sets that meet the criteria. The intersection is specifically over the family of all sets that satisfy the defined properties.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of propositional variables and binary connectives
  • Familiarity with set theory concepts, particularly intersections
  • Basic knowledge of mathematical logic
  • Ability to interpret formal definitions in mathematical texts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of sets in mathematical logic
  • Learn about the construction of natural numbers in set theory
  • Explore the role of propositional languages in formal logic
  • Investigate the implications of closure properties in algebraic structures
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematical logic, educators teaching formal logic concepts, and anyone interested in the foundations of propositional languages and set theory.

V0ODO0CH1LD
Messages
278
Reaction score
0
I am currently reading Rautenberg's book on mathematical logic, in it he defines a propositional language ##\mathcal{F}##, set theoretically, as the smallest (i.e. the intersection) of all sets of strings ##S## built from propositional variables (##\ p_1,p_2,\ldots##) as well as any binary connectives on those variables, with the properties:
(1)\ p_1,p_2,\ldots\in{}S;\quad{}(2)\ \alpha,\beta\in{}S\Rightarrow(\alpha\circ\beta)\in{}S
How does this definition work? Is ##S## supposed to be representing strings or a set? Is ##S## supposed to be the set of all strings with those properties? Or is ##\mathcal{F}##? Also, what am I supposed to be intersecting there?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
V0ODO0CH1LD said:
I am currently reading Rautenberg's book on mathematical logic, in it he defines a propositional language ##\mathcal{F}##, set theoretically, as the smallest (i.e. the intersection) of all sets of strings ##S## built from propositional variables (##\ p_1,p_2,\ldots##) as well as any binary connectives on those variables, with the properties:
(1)\ p_1,p_2,\ldots\in{}S;\quad{}(2)\ \alpha,\beta\in{}S\Rightarrow(\alpha\circ\beta)\in{}S
How does this definition work? Is ##S## supposed to be representing strings or a set? Is ##S## supposed to be the set of all strings with those properties? Or is ##\mathcal{F}##? Also, what am I supposed to be intersecting there?

Not sure what you mean by the definition "working".

##S## is an arbitrary set of strings which has the two properties listed. The properties listed are properties of sets of strings, not properties of strings. ##\mathcal{F}## is a particular set of strings which has the two properties listed; the smallest such set in the sense that it is contained in all other such sets. The intersection is taking place over the family of all sets satisfying the two properties.

For comparison, one slightly shady way of defining the natural numbers is to say that ##\mathbb{N}## is the smallest of all sets ##S## of members of ##\mathbb{R}## with the properties:
(1)\ 0\in S\text{ and }(2)\ x\in S\Rightarrow x+1\in S
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K