MHB Rules of Inference for Proving p→(p→q)→(p→q)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Yankel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rules
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the logical statement p→(p→q)→(p→q) using a deductive system. The user has filled in most proof stages but is struggling with the last stage, specifically identifying the rule or axiom used. They have provided a table of proof stages, relevant axioms, and previously proved statements. The only inference rule available is modus ponens, and the user believes that the last stage follows from applying modus ponens to earlier stages. Assistance is sought to confirm this reasoning and complete the proof.
Yankel
Messages
390
Reaction score
0
Hello to you all,

I am trying to prove the following:

\[\vdash \left ( p\rightarrow \left ( p\rightarrow q \right ) \right )\rightarrow \left ( p\rightarrow q \right )\]

I was given a table with the proof stages, and I had to fill the blanks. Sometimes the blanks were the rule or axiom used in this stage, and sometimes it was the result of using the rule/axiom. I filled all, but I can't figure out the last stage. More specifically, I can't figure out which rule / axiom was used in the last stage (stage 7). I have completed all other stages, and I think it's correct.

I am attaching as figures, the table of the proof, the 3 axioms I am allowed to use (I am using the L deductive system), and 4 statements which were proved already and can be used. In addition, the only inference rule is the modus ponens.

Thank you in advance for helping me complete the last stage.

View attachment 6043View attachment 6044View attachment 6045
 

Attachments

  • ax1.JPG
    ax1.JPG
    32.9 KB · Views: 156
  • ax2.JPG
    ax2.JPG
    5.6 KB · Views: 119
  • ax3.JPG
    ax3.JPG
    4.4 KB · Views: 130
Physics news on Phys.org
I think 7 follows by MP from 3 and 6.
 
I think you are correct, I didn't see it. Thank you ! (Yes)
 
There is a nice little variation of the problem. The host says, after you have chosen the door, that you can change your guess, but to sweeten the deal, he says you can choose the two other doors, if you wish. This proposition is a no brainer, however before you are quick enough to accept it, the host opens one of the two doors and it is empty. In this version you really want to change your pick, but at the same time ask yourself is the host impartial and does that change anything. The host...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
493
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K