Proof of a simple logic statement

  • Thread starter Thread starter soopo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logic Proof
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
3 replies · 4K views
soopo
Messages
222
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


[tex]\forall x \in S <-> \exists x \not \in S[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


The statement is clearly false.
I will try to show that by the proof of contradiction.

Let
[tex]P: \forall x \in S[/tex]
and
[tex]Q: \exists x \not\in S[/tex]

The negation of Q is
[tex]negQ: \forall x \not\in S[/tex]
and the negation of P is
[tex]negP: \exists x \in S[/tex].

negQ means that all x are not in S, while negP means that there is one x in S.
This is a contradiction.

Therefore, the original statement must be false.

Is my proof correct?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your statement is a bit odd.
"For all x in S, is equivalent to there exists an x such that there exists an S"
What is on the right hand side? What does x exist in and there exist x and S such that what?In first-order logic, your statement is not a well-formed formula :-p
 
CompuChip said:
"For all x in S, is equivalent to there exists an x such that there exists an S"
What is on the right hand side? What does x exist in and there exist x and S such that what?

The statement should be "For all x in S, is equivalent to there does not exist an x in S."

The rest of the proof is also now as I want.
 
CompuChip said:
Your statement is a bit odd.
"For all x in S, is equivalent to there exists an x such that there exists an S"
What is on the right hand side? What does x exist in and there exist x and S such that what?


In first-order logic, your statement is not a well-formed formula :-p

I agree with you. The statement is still false.

Perhaps, the initial statement should be
[tex]\forall x \in S <=> \neg(\exists x \not \in S)[/tex]

It means that: all x in S is equivalent with the negation of the statement that
there exists x not in S.