(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); 1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

A universal (or ∀_1) formula is one of the form ∀x_1∀x_2...∀x_nθ, where θ is quantifier-free.

An existential (or ∃_1) formula is one of the form ∃_1∃_2...∃x_n θ.

Let A be a substructure of B, and s valuation on A.

a) Show that if ⊨_B ψ and ψ is universal, then ⊨_A ψ . Also show that if ⊨_A ψ and ψ is existential, then ⊨_B ψ .

b) Use part (a) to show that the sentence (∃x Px) is not logically equivalent to any universal formula, and that (∀x Px) is not logically equivalent to any existential formula.

2. Relevant equations

→satisfiability?

3. The attempt at a solution

My professor goes too quickly with satisfiability, and he expects me to solve such problem.

Here are some thoughts I have..

a) Since ψ is universal, we can say that ⊨_B ∀x_1∀x_2...∀x_n θ . I would say that since θ is quantifier free, no matter what type of symbols you have for θ, then, it must be just ∀x_1∀x_2...∀x_n θ = θ. I am thinking that I need to use induction principle for this part.

Seems like I lack some understanding of how the proof should work. -___-

b) I am not sure how to work out part b.

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Homework Help: Hardest logic problem!

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**