# OPEN PROPOSITION

QUANTIFICATION

Definition: An open proposition is a declarative sentence which
contains one or more variables is not a proposition produces a proposition when each of its variables is replaced by a specific object from a designated set

Universe of Discourse (U)
set of objects which the variables (in the open proposition) can represent may be established explicitly, or may be left implicit

OPEN PROPOSITION
Examples
the number x + 1 is an even integer 2x + y = 5 ∧ x - 3y = 8 x12 + x22 + x32 = 14 x is a rational number. y>5 x+y=5 x climbed Mt. Everest. He is a lawyer and she is a scientist.

OPEN PROPOSITION
Functional notation
P(x) can denote x + 1 is even Q(x, y) can denote 2x + y = 5 ∧ x - 3y = 8 R(x1, x2, x3) can denote x12 + x22 + x32 = 14

Actual values can take the place of the variables (the open proposition becomes a proposition)
P(1) is true Q(2, 1) is false R(1, 2, 3) is true

BINDING A VARIABLE
Individual variables (in an open proposition) must be bound in order to change the open proposition into a proposition
Assign values P(x) is an open proposition; P(10) has a truth value Quantification universal quantification
∀x P(x) ∃x P(x) For all x, P(x). There exists an x such that P(x).

QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS
Universal Quantification
to determine the truth value:
∀x P(x) is true if all elements of U satisfies P(x) (i.e., the truth set for P(x) is the entire universe) ∀x P(x) is false if there is at least one c ∈ U such that P(x) is false

forms: For all x…, All x such that…, For each x… For every x…, Each/Every x such that… examples
Let P( x ): x2 ≥ 4 (U = R) ∀x P(x) is false. Let P( x ): x2 > 0 (U = Z+) ∀x P(x) is true.

existential quantification

1

QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS
Existential Quantification
to determine the truth value:
∃x P(x) is true if if there is at least one c ∈ U such that P(x) is satisfied (i.e., the truth set for P(x) is not empty) ∃x P(x) is false if for all c ∈ U, P(c) is false

QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS
If an open proposition involves the two variables x and y, the following possibilities exist:
(∀x)(∀y) P(x,y) (∃x)(∀y) P(x,y) (∀y)(∀x) P(x,y) (∀y)(∃x) P(x,y) (∀x)(∃y) P(x,y) (∃x)(∃y) P(x,y) (∃y)(∀x) P(x,y) (∃y)(∃x) P(x,y)

forms: There is an x such that…, There is at least one x such that…, For some x… examples
Let P( x ): x + 75= 80 (U = Z+) ∃x P(x) is true.

Examples
1. (∀x)(∃y) (x + y = 5) 2. (∃y)(∀x) (x + y = 5) 3. (∀x)(∀y) (x∈R ∧ y∈R → xy ∈ R)

Exercises

QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS
4 types of quantified propositions
Let H(x): x is human. M(x): x is mortal. Universal Affirmative
All humans are mortal ∀x (H(x) → M(x)) ∀x (H(x) → ¬M(x)) ∃x (H(x) ∧ M(x))

QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS
Quantification Negation:
1. ¬∃x A(x) ≡ ∀x ¬(A(x)) 2. ¬∀x A(x) ≡ ∃x ¬( A(x) ) 3. ¬∃x (A(x) ∧ B(x)) ≡ ∀x (A(x) → ¬B(x)) 4. ¬∀x (A(x) → B(x)) ≡ ∃x (A(x) ∧ ¬B(x))

Universal Negative
No human is mortal.

Existential Affirmative
Some humans are mortal.

Existential Negative
Some humans are not mortal. ∃x (H(x) ∧ ¬M(x))

QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS
Examples
1. For all x (x is prime implies (x2 + 1) is even).

QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS
Examples
2. There exists an x such that (x is rational ∧

∀x (x is prime → x2 + 1 is even) negation: ≡ ¬∀x (x is prime → x2 + 1 is even) ≡ ∃x (x is prime ∧ x2 + 1 is not even) There exists an x such that x is prime and x2 +1 is odd.

x2 = 3) ∃x (x is rational ∧ x2 = 3) negation: ≡ ¬∃x (x is rational ∧ x2 = 3) ≡ ∀x (x is rational → x2 <> 3) For all x, x is rational and x2 is not equal to three.

2

QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS
Examples
3. There exists an x such that for all y (xy = y).

QUANTIFICATION RULES
Universal Instantiation/Specification ∀x P( x ) * c is an arbitrary element of U ∴P( c ) 2. Existential Instantiation/Specification ∃x P( x ) ∴ P( c ) * c is some element of U 3. Universal Generalization ( UG ) P( c ) ∴ ∀x P( x ) 4. Existential Generalization ( EG ) P( c ) ∴ ∃x P( x )
1.

∃x (∀y (xy = y)) negation: ≡ ¬∃x (∀y (xy = y)) ≡ ∀x (∃y (xy < > y)) For all x, there exists a y such that xy is not equal to y.

Exercises

QUANTIFICATION RULES
Example
No mortals are perfect. All humans are mortals. Therefore, no humans are perfect.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

BINARY RELATIONS
Definition
express relations between two individuals

1) ∀x (M(x) → ¬P(x)) 2) ∀x (H(x) → M(x)) ∴ ∀x (H(x) → ¬P(x)) 3) M(c) → ¬P(c) Universal Instantiation 1 4) H(c) → M(c) Universal Instantiation 2 5) H(c) → ¬P(c) Hypothetical Syllogism 4, 5 6) ∀x (H(x) → ¬P(x)) Universal Generalization 5

Examples
Plato was a student of Socrates. Baguio is north of Manila. Chicago is smaller than New York.

Exercises

BINARY RELATIONS
Let A(x, y): x was a student of y
p: Plato s: Socrates Plato was a student of everybody. ∀x A(p, x) Plato was a student of somebody. ∃x A(p, x) Everybody was a student of Socrates. ∀x A(x, s) Some person was a student of Socrates. ∃x A(x, s) Everybody was a student of everybody. ∀x∀y A(x, y)

BINARY RELATIONS
Example
Helen likes David. Whoever likes David likes Tom. Helen likes only good looking men. Therefore, Tom is a good looking man. Let h: Helen; d: David; t: Tom L(x, y): x likes y.; G(x): x is a good looking man. 1) L(h, d) 2) ∀x (L( x, d ) → L( x, t )) 3) ∀x (L( h, x ) → G(x)) ∴ G(t)

3

Determine the truth values: (U = { 1,2,3... } = Z+) 1. ∀x (x is a prime → x is odd) 2. ∀x∀y (x is odd ∧ y is odd) → x ∗ y is odd 3. ∃w (2w + 1 = 5) 4. ∃x (2x + 1 = 5 ∧ x 2 = 9)

Negate the following: 1. All officers are fighters. 2. Some officers are fighters. Translate each of the following statements into symbols, using quantifiers, variables, and predicate symbols. 1. All members are either parents or teachers. 2. Some politicians are either disloyal or misguided. 3. All birds can fly 4. Not all birds can fly 5. All babies are illogical 6. Some babies are illogical 7. If Joseph is a man, then Joseph is a giant 8. There is a student who likes mathematics but not history

Determine the truth values of the following sentences: (U = Z) 1. ∀x [x2-2 ≥ 0] 2. ∀x [x2-10x+21 = 0] 3. ∃x [x2-10x+21 = 0] 4. ∀x [x2-x-1 ≠ 0] 5. ∃x [x2-3 = 0] 6. ∃x [(x2>10) ∧ (x is even)]

Construct a proof of validity: Tigers are fierce and dangerous. Some tigers are beautiful. Therefore, some dangerous things are beautiful. 1) ∀x [ T(x) → ( F(x) ∧ D(x) ) ] 2) ∃x [ T(x) ∧ B(x) ] ∴∃x ( D(x) ∧ B(x))
3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) T(c) ∧ B(c) T(c) → ( F(c) ∧ D(c) ) T(c) F(c) ∧ D(c) D(c) B(c) D(c) ∧ B(c) ∃x [ D(x) ∧ B(x) ] Existential Instantiation ( 2 ) Universal Instantiation ( 1 ) Simplification ( 3 ) Modus Ponens ( 4 )( 5 ) Simplification ( 6 ) Simplification ( 3 ) Conjunction ( 7 )( 8 ) Existential Generalization ( 9 )

Construct a proof of validity: Mathematicians are neither prophets nor wizards. Hence, if Einstein is a mathematician, he is not a prophet. 1) ∀x [ M(x) → ¬( P(x) ∨ W(x) ) ] ∴ M(e) → ¬P(e) 2) M(e) Rule of Conditional Proof ∴¬P(e)
3) M(e) → ¬(P(e) ∨ W(e)) Universal Instantiation ( 1 ) 4) ¬( P(e) ∨ W(e) ) Modus Ponens ( 2 )( 3 ) 5) ¬P(e) ∧ ¬W(e) de Morgan’s law ( 4 ) 6) ¬P(e) Simplification ( 5 )

Construct a proof of validity: Some cats are animals. Some dogs are animals. Therefore, some cats are dogs. 1) ∃x ( C(x) ∧ A(x) ) 2) ∃x( D(x) ∧ A(x) ) ∴∃x( C(x) ∧ D(x) )
3) C(w) ∧ A(w) 4 ) D(w) ∧ A(w) 5) C(w) 6) D(w) 7) C(w) ∧ D(w) 8) ∃x ( C(x) ∧ D(x) ) Existential Instantiation ( 1 ) Existential Instantiation ( 2 ) Simplification ( 3 ) Simplification ( 4 ) Conjunction ( 5 )( 6 ) Existential Generalization ( 7 )

Construct a proof of validity: Helen likes David. Whoever likes David likes Tom. Helen likes only good looking men. Therefore, Tom is a good looking man. Let : h = Helen; d = David; t = Tom G(x): x is a good looking man L(x, y): x likes y
1) L( h, d ) 2) ∀x [ L( x, d ) → L( x, t ) ] 3) ∀x[ L( h, x ) → G(x) ] ∴G(t) 4) 5) 6) 7) L( h, d ) → L( h, t ) L( h, t ) L( h, t ) → G(t) G(t) Universal Instantiation( 2 ) Modus Ponens( 1 )( 4 ) Universal Instantiation ( 3 ) Modus Ponens( 5 )( 6 )

4