Proving Math Logic: Solving the Existential Quantifier

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dragonfall
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logic
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
2 replies · 2K views
Dragonfall
Messages
1,023
Reaction score
5
I need to prove the following:

[tex]\forall x\forall y[(fy=x)\rightarrow Qx]\vdash \exists xQx[/tex].

I can't do it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is this even true? Seems a bit fishy.
 
I take it f is a function. It shouldn't seem fishy--after all fy has to equal something (most logics contain the assumption that the universe contains at least one object), and whatever it equals must have property Q.

I am not familiar with the rules of your specific inference system. One plausible way, whether it's sufficiently formal for a logic derivation I do not know, is to instantiate the premise with y and fy, so you get
(fy = fy) -> Qfy
And maybe you have a premise that x = x for all x, so you could then derive Qfy
Then use existential generalization on fy (is this legal in your system?) to obtain
[tex]\exists[/tex]x Qx