Propositional Logic, Predicates and Quantifiers: Antonio Montero

1.
Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers
Antonio Montero
York University
Math1190
Introduction to sets and logic
Winter 2020
A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 1 / 59

Table of contents:
1 Propositions
2 Logical connectors
Negation
Conjunction
Disjunction
Conditionals
Biconditionals
3 Applications
4 Logical equivalences
DeMorgan’s laws
Other examples
5 Predicates and Quantifiers
Quantifiers
Nested quantifiers

Q: what is Mathematics?

I The truth, I don’t know.

I I usually think of them as a language to communicate ideas.

Q: how do we do Mathematics?
I We usually do not state facts.

I Instead, we say things like IF . . . THEN . . . .

I An then we PROVE them.

I Proofs make Mathematics different to other sciences.

I Proofs make Mathematics different to other sciences.
I The key is to always follow the rules: logic.

Propositions
Definition
A proposition is a declarative sentence that is either true or false

Propositions
Definition
Example: are the following sentences propositions?

The Moon is made of cheese.

Propositions
Definition

The Moon is made of cheese. YES!

Propositions
Definition

Sit down!

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
Toronto is the capital of Canada.

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
Toronto is the capital of Canada. YES!

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3.

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
What time is it?

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
What time is it? NO!

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
Is today Wednesday?

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
Is today Wednesday? NO!

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
The area of a square of side 1 is 35.

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
The area of a square of side 1 is 35. YES!

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
x + 1 = 2.

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
x + 1 = 2. NO!

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
x + 1 = 2. NO!
a2 + b2 = c2 .

Propositions
Definition

Sit down! NO!
1 + 1 = 3. YES!
x + 1 = 2. NO!
a2 + b2 = c2 . NO!

Propositions
We use Propositional Variables: p, q, r . . .

Propositions
If a proposition is true we say that its truth-value is “true” (or T).

Propositions
Similarly, if a proposition is false we say that its truth-value is “false”

(or F).

Propositions

(or F).
If a proposition that cannot be expressed in terms of simpler

propositions is called atomic, otherwise it is called compound.

Propositions

(or F).
If a proposition that cannot be expressed in terms of simpler

propositions is called atomic, otherwise it is called compound.
I My shirt is black.
I My shirt is black and my jeans are blue.

Compound proposition and logical operators
Negation
Definition
If p is a proposition, then the negation of p, denoted by ¬p, the
proposition that has exactly the opposite truth-vale of p.
p ¬p
T F
F T
Table: The truth-table of ¬p.

Negation
Definition
p ¬p
T F
F T
The propositions p and ¬p cannot have the same truth-value.

Negation
Definition
p ¬p
T F
F T

¬p can be read as “not p” or “it is not the case that p”.

Negation
Definition
p ¬p
T F
F T

¬p can be read as “not p” or “it is not the case that p”.
Other forms of denoting ¬p: p̃, −p, p̄, p0 , !p.

Negation
Find the negation of the following propositions:

Antonio’s computer runs Linux.

Negation

Betty loves pizza.

Negation

Betty loves pizza.
The Earth is round.

Conjunction
Definition
If p and q are propositions, the conjunction p ∧ q is the proposition
“p and q”

Conjunction
Definition
“p and q”
p q p∧q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F

Conjunction
Definition
“p and q”
p q p∧q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F
In other words p ∧ q is true exactly when both p and q are true.

Conjunction
Definition
“p and q”
p q p∧q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F
In other words p ∧ q is true exactly when both p and q are true.

If p is “The Earth is round” and q is “The Earth travels around the
Sun”, what is p ∧ q?

Disjunction
Definition
If p and q are propositions, the disjunction p ∨ q is the proposition
“p or q”

Disjunction
Definition
“p or q”
p q p∨q
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F

Disjunction
Definition
“p or q”
p q p∨q
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F
In other words p ∨ q is true exactly when any, p or q is true.

Disjunction
Definition
“p or q”
p q p∨q
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F
In other words p ∨ q is true exactly when any, p or q is true.

Find p and q such that “Marco and Jessica will drink coffee or go to
the movies tonight” is p ∨ q.

A note on “or”
When the sentence “I will use all my savings to go to Europe or to

buy a new car” is true?

A note on “or”
When the sentence “I will use all my savings to go to Europe or to

buy a new car” is true?
Definition
If p and q are propositions, the exclusive or p ⊕ q is the proposition that
has as truth-table
p q p⊕q
T T F
T F T
F T T
F F F

We can now build very complicated propositions using ¬, ∧ and ∨ (and

even ⊕):


even ⊕):
(p ∧ q) ∧ s can be written as p ∧ q ∧ s.


even ⊕):
Similarly, (p ∨ q) ∨ s can be written as p ∨ q ∧ s.


even ⊕):
Can we write (p ∨ q) ∧ s as p ∨ q ∧ s?


even ⊕):
Can we write (p ∨ q) ∧ s as p ∨ q ∧ s?
Be careful, more on this later.

The most important connector in mathematics
Consider the proposition
“If you study mathematics, then you will find a good job”

Consider the proposition
“If you study mathematics, then you will find a good job”
Definition
Let p and q are propositions, then conditional proposition p → q is the
proposition that has the following truth-table
p q p→q
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T
This can be read as “If p, then q”.

Other ways of reading (and understanding) p → q
If it is winter, then it gets cold.

If p, then q.

If p, then q.
If p, q.

If p, then q.
If p, q.
p if sufficient for q.

If p, then q.
If p, q.
q if p.

If p, then q.
If p, q.
q if p.
q when p.

If p, then q.
If p, q.
q if p.
q when p.
A necessary condition for p is
q.

If p, then q.
If p, q.
q if p.
q when p.
q.
q unless ¬p.

If p, then q. p implies q.
If p, q.
q if p.
q when p.
q.
q unless ¬p.

If p, q. p only if q
q if p.
q when p.
q.
q unless ¬p.

p if sufficient for q. A sufficient condition for q is
q if p. p.
q when p.
q.
q unless ¬p.

q if p. p.
q when p. q whenever p.
q.
q unless ¬p.

q if p. p.
A necessary condition for p is q is necessary for p
q.
q unless ¬p.

q if p. p.
q. q follows from p.
q unless ¬p.

q if p. p.
q. q follows from p.
q unless ¬p. q provided that p.

Converse, contrapositive and inverse
Definition
Consider the proposition p → q.
The converse is q → p.

Definition
The contrapositive is ¬q → ¬p.

Definition
The inverse is ¬p → ¬q.

Definition
The inverse is ¬p → ¬q.

Example
Find the converse, the contrapositive and the inverse of
“The Toronto Bluejays win whenever it is raining”.

Example
Find the converse, the contrapositive and the inverse of
“The Toronto Bluejays win whenever it is raining”.
Which of them are equivalent?

Biconditionals
Definition
Let p and q propositions. The biconditional p ↔ q is the proposition that
is true exactly then p and q have the same truth-value. This reads “p if
and only if q”.

Biconditionals
Definition
and only if q”.
p and q could be Tor F, but they have to be the same.

Biconditionals
Definition
and only if q”.

p ↔ q is another way of writing (p → q) ∧ (p → q) (how could we
prove this?).

Biconditionals
Definition
and only if q”.

p ↔ q is another way of writing (p → q) ∧ (p → q) (how could we
prove this?).
Warning: In English, we sometimes use the expression “If . . . , then
. . . ” to actually mean a biconditional. Consider
“If you have a ticket, then you can board the plane”.

Biconditionals
Other ways of reading p ↔ q are:

Biconditionals

“p is necessary and sufficient for q”

Biconditionals

“If p then q, and conversely”.

Biconditionals

“If p then q, and conversely”.
“p iff q”.

Precedence of logical operations
Just as we have a precedence of arithmetic operators (+, −, ×,÷, etc.),
we have a precedence of logical operators.

Precedence Operator
1 ¬
∧,
2
∨
→,
3
↔

Precedence Operator
1 ¬
∧,
2
∨
→,
3
↔

So that ¬p → r ∧ s means (¬p) → (r ∧ s) and not ¬ p → (r ∧ s) or
¬(p → r) ∧ s.

Precedence Operator
1 ¬
∧,
2
∨
→,
3
↔

So that ¬p → r ∧ s means (¬p) → (r ∧ s) and not ¬ p → (r ∧ s) or
¬(p → r) ∧ s.
Keep in mind that ∧ and ∨ have the same precedence so that we do
need parenthesis for expressions like p ∧ q ∨ r (this is not the case
with + and −).

Let’s think
Translate the following English sentences to propositional logic:
1 You study the theory and work on exercises, but you don’t understand
the material.
2 Studying the theory is sufficient for understanding the material.
3 In order to work on exercises, you need to study the theory.
4 When you study the theory and work on exercises, you understand the
material.
5 You don’t understand the material unless you study the theory and
work on exercises.

Some real-world applications
1 System specifications (programming).


2 Boolean searches (Google!).


2 Boolean searches (Google!).
3 Logical circuits.

Logical equivalences
Definition
A tautology is a proposition that is always true. On the other hand a
contradiction is a proposition that is always false.

Definition
p ∨ ¬p is a tautology.
p ∧ ¬p is a contradiction. (why?)

Definition

Definition
p ¬p p ∨ ¬p p ∧ ¬p
T F T F
F T T F

Definition
Let p and q two propositions, we say that p and q are equivalent if the
proposition p ↔ q is a tautology. In this situation, we write
p ≡ q.

Definition
Let p and q two propositions, we say that p and q are equivalent if the
proposition p ↔ q is a tautology. In this situation, we write
p ≡ q.
≡ is not a logical connector, p ≡ q is short for the expression “p ↔ q

is a tautology”.

Q: Given p and q,
how do we prove that p ≡ q?

Q: Given p and q,
how do we prove that p 6≡ q?

Q: Given p and q,
If we want to prove that p ≡ q all we can do (for now) is to check the

complete truth-table.

Q: Given p and q,
If we want to prove that p ≡ q all we can do (for now) is to check the

complete truth-table. If we want to prove that p 6≡ q we only need one row
of the truth-table where p and q do not agree.

DeMorgan’s laws
Example (DeMorgan’s laws)

If p and q are propositions, then
¬(p ∧ q) ≡ ¬p ∨ ¬q
¬(p ∨ q) ≡ ¬p ∧ ¬q

DeMorgan’s laws
Example (DeMorgan’s laws)

If p and q are propositions, then
¬(p ∧ q) ≡ ¬p ∨ ¬q
¬(p ∨ q) ≡ ¬p ∧ ¬q
How do we prove this?
p q ¬p ¬q ¬(p ∧ q) ¬p ∨ ¬q ¬(p ∨ q) ¬p ∧ ¬q
T T F F F F F F
T F F T T T F F
F T T F T T F F
F F T T T T T T

Example (Conditional-disjunction equivalence)

Prove that if p and q are propositions, then p → q is equivalent to ¬p ∨ q.

Example (Conditional-disjunction equivalence)

Prove that if p and q are propositions, then p → q is equivalent to ¬p ∨ q.
p q ¬p p→q ¬p ∨ q
T T F T T
T F F F F
F T T T T
F F T T T

We can continue for ever proving new logical equivalences.

We can continue for ever proving new logical equivalences. It makes

no sense.


no sense.
There is a document in the course website (moodle) with some tables

of important logical equivalences.


no sense.
There is a document in the course website (moodle) with some tables

of important logical equivalences.
We better learn how to use them:

Example
What is the negation of the sentence “If you study math, then you will get
a good job”?

Example
What is the negation of the sentence “If you study math, then you will get
a good job”?
In fact, we just proved that ¬(p → q) ≡ p ∧ ¬q.

Example
Show that ¬ (p ∨ (¬p ∧ q)) and ¬p ∧ ¬q are logically equivalent.

Example
Solution:
¬ (p ∨ (¬p ∧ q)) ≡ ¬p ∧ ¬(¬p ∧ q) DeMorgan’s law.

Example
Solution:
≡ ¬p ∧ (¬(¬p) ∨ ¬q) DeMorgan’s law

Example
Solution:
≡ ¬p ∧ (p ∨ ¬q) Double negation.

Example
Solution:
≡ (¬p ∧ p) ∨ (¬p ∧ ¬q) Distributive law.

Example
Solution:
≡ F ∨ (¬p ∧ ¬q) Negation law.

Example
Solution:
≡ F ∨ (¬p ∧ ¬q) Negation law.
≡ ¬p ∧ ¬q Identity law.

Predicates
Propositional logic is limited.

Predicates

I “Every computer connected to the university is working properly ”.
I “MATH03 is working properly”.

Predicates

I “CS02 is under the attack of an intruder”
I “There is a computer that is under the attack of an intruder”.

Predicates

I “CS02 is under the attack of an intruder”
I “There is a computer that is under the attack of an intruder”.
We understand those sentences in English, but propositional logic is

not enough. We need predicate logic.

Predicates
Consider the following statements:

“x > 3 ”
“Computer x is under the attack of an intruder”
“Computer x is connected to computer y”.

Predicates

“x > 3 ”
Those are examples of predicates.

They involve variables.

Predicates

“x > 3 ”
Those are examples of predicates.

They involve variables.
Once we assign values to all the variables, they become propositions.

Predicates
Example
Let P (x) denote the predicate
x > 3.
What are the truth values of P (4) and P (2)?

Predicates
Example
Let P (x) denote the predicate
x > 3.
What are the truth values of P (4) and P (2)?
Solution: P (4) is the statement
4 > 3,
which is true (T). On the other hand P (2) is the proposition
2 > 3,
which is false (F).

Predicates
Example
Let Q(x, y) denote the predicate
x = y + 3.
What are the truth values of Q(1, 2) and Q(3, 0)?

Predicates
Example
Let Q(x, y) denote the predicate
x = y + 3.
What are the truth values of Q(1, 2) and Q(3, 0)?
Solution: Q(1, 2) is the statement 1 = 2 + 3, which is F. Q(3, 0) is the

proposition 3 = 0 + 3, which is T

Predicates
In general, a predicate can involve several variables, one involving n

variable looks like
P (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ).

Predicates

variable looks like
P (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ).
The number of variables of a predicate is called the arity. We have

seen some unary and binary predicates. The one above is a n-ary one.

Predicates

variable looks like
P (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ).

P is called the propositional formula of the predicate.

Predicates

variable looks like
P (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ).

P is called the propositional formula of the predicate.
Sometimes it is useful to think a predicate as a machine that

produces propositions.

Quantifiers
There is another way of obtaining propositions from propositional

formulas: quantification.

Quantifiers

Quantification express the extend to which a predicate is true over a

range of elements.

Quantifiers


range of elements.
In English, we use words as all, some, many, few and none to express
quantification.

Quantifiers


range of elements.
In English, we use words as all, some, many, few and none to express
quantification.
In mathematics we use just three: Universal, Existential and

Uniqueness.

Quantifiers
Universal quantifier
Definition
The universal quantification of P (x) is the statement
“P (x) for all the elements x in the domain.”
The symbols ∀x P (x) denotes the universal quantification. ∀ is the

universal quantifier.

Quantifiers
Definition

∀x P (x) is read “for all x, P (x)” or “for every x, P (x).

Quantifiers
Definition


The universal quantification depends on the domain and this must be
always specified.

Quantifiers
Definition


The universal quantification depends on the domain and this must be
always specified.
An element x which makes ∀x P (x) false is called a counterexample.

Quantifiers
Example
Let P (x) be the statement
x + 1 > x.
What is the truth value for the proposition ∀x P (x) if the domain consists
of all real numbers?

Quantifiers
Example
x + 1 > x.
What is the truth value for the proposition ∀x P (x) if the domain consists
Solution: For every real number x, the number x + 1 > x. Therefore

∀x P (x) is T.

Quantifiers
Example
Let Q(x) be the statement
x < 2.
What is the truth value for the proposition ∀x Q(x) if the domain consists
of the integer numbers?

Quantifiers
Example
x < 2.
What is the truth value for the proposition ∀x Q(x) if the domain consists
Solution: Q(x) is not true for every integer, for example Q(3) is F.
Therefore, 3 is a counterexample. Thus ∀x Q(x) is F.

Quantifiers
Example
Let S(x) be the statement
x2 > 0.
What is the truth value for the proposition ∀x S(x) if
the domain consists of the integer numbers?
the domain consists of the positive integers?

Quantifiers
Example
x2 > 0.
Solution: In the first case ∀x S(x) is F, in the second it is T.

Quantifiers
Example
x2 > 0.
The truth-value of ∀x S(x) depends on the domain.

Quantifiers
Example
x2 > 0.

∀x S(x) is false if there exists a counterexample.

Quantifiers
Example
x2 > 0.

∀x S(x) is false if there exists a counterexample.
If the domain is empty, then ∀x S(x) is T. There is no
counterexample.

Quantifiers
Existential quantifier
Definition
The existential quantification of P (x) is the statement
“There exists an element x in the domain such that P (x) ”
The symbols ∃x P (x) denotes the existential quantification. ∃ is the

existential quantifier.

Quantifiers
Definition

Besides “there exists” we can use “for some”, “for at least one” or
“there is”.

Quantifiers
Definition

Besides “there exists” we can use “for some”, “for at least one” or
“there is”.
The universal quantification depends on the domain. In fact, if the
domain is not specified, the expression ∃x P (x) makes no sense.

Quantifiers
Example
x > 3.
What is the truth value for the proposition ∃x P (x) if the domain consists

Quantifiers
Example
x > 3.
What is the truth value for the proposition ∃x P (x) if the domain consists
Solution: P (x) is true for several examples, for instance, when x = 4.

Therefore ∃x P (x) is T.

Quantifiers
Example
x = x + 1.
What is the truth value for the proposition ∃x Q(x) if the domain consists

Quantifiers
Example
x = x + 1.
Solution: Q(x) is false for every x. Therefore ∃x Q(x) is F.

Quantifiers
Example
x = x + 1.
Solution: Q(x) is false for every x. Therefore ∃x Q(x) is F.
If the domain is empty, then ∃x S(x) is always F (for any

propositional formula S).

Quantifiers
The uniqueness quantifier
We could define other quantifiers:

There exists a unique element x such that P (x).

Quantifiers

There are at least two elements x such that P (x).

Quantifiers

There are exactly two elements x such that P (x).

Quantifiers

...

Quantifiers

...
Among those, only the first one has a name:
Definition
The uniqueness quantification of P , denoted by ∃!x P (x) is the
proposition
(∃x P (x)) ∧ (∀y (x 6= y → ¬P (y)))

Quantifiers
Quantifiers have higher precedence than any logical operator so that

∀x P (x) ∧ Q(x) means (∀x P (x)) ∧ Q(x) and not ∀x (P (x) ∧ Q(x)).

Quantifiers

In order to turn an expression of propositional formulas to a
proposition every variable must have an assigned value or be under
the scope of a quantifier.

Quantifiers

In order to turn an expression of propositional formulas to a
proposition every variable must have an assigned value or be under
the scope of a quantifier.
If Q(x, y) is the expression x + y = 1, then ∀x Q(x, y) is not a
proposition but ∀x Q(x, 1) is.

Quantifiers
Definition
Two propositional formulas P and Q are logically equivalent if any
predicates resulting from them have the same value for any given domain.
We write P ≡ Q

Quantifiers
Definition
Two propositional formulas P and Q are logically equivalent if any
predicates resulting from them have the same value for any given domain.
We write P ≡ Q
Example
The formulas ∀x (P (x) ∧ Q(x)) and (∀x P (x)) ∧ (∀x Q(x)) are equivalent.

Quantifiers
Negating quantifiers
What is the negation of the following sentences?:

All swans are black.

Quantifiers

I There exists a swan that is not black

Quantifiers

Every math professor is handsome.

Quantifiers

I There is a math professor that is not handsome

Quantifiers

There is a student in MATH 1190 that is also taking Calculus.

Quantifiers

I Every student in MATH 1190 is not taking calculus.

Quantifiers

I Every student in MATH 1190 is not taking calculus.
Proposition (DeMorgan’s laws for quantifiers)

¬ (∀x P (x)) ≡ ∃x (¬P (x))
¬ (∃x P (x)) ≡ ∀x (¬P (x))

Quantifiers
Quantifier When it is T When it is F

∀x P (x) Whenever P (x) When there
is T for every exists an element
element x of the x in the domain
domain. such that P (x)
is F.
∃x P (x) Whenever there When P (x) is F
is an element x for every element
in the domain x of the domain.
such that P (x)
is T.

Quantifiers
Quantifier When it is T When it is F

∀x P (x) Whenever P (x) When there
is T for every exists an element
element x of the x in the domain
domain. such that P (x)
is F.
∃x P (x) Whenever there When P (x) is F
is an element x for every element
in the domain x of the domain.
such that P (x)
is T.
Note: In general, it is harder to prove that an expression ∀x P (x) is T.

Quantifiers
Example
What is the negation of the statement
∀x (x2 > x) and ∃x (x2 = 2)?

Quantifiers
Example
What is the negation of the statement
∀x (x2 > x) and ∃x (x2 = 2)?
Solution: The statement has the form (∀x G(x)) ∧ (∃x T (x)), hence the
negation is evaluated as follows
¬ ((∀x G(x)) ∧ (∃x T (x))) ≡ ¬(∀x G(x)) ∨ ¬(∃x T (x))

≡ ∃x ¬G(x) ∨ ∀x ¬T (x)
Which is “There exists x such that (x2 6 x) or for all x, x2 6= 2”.

Quantifiers
Example
Show that the statements ¬ (∀x (P (x) → Q(x))) and ∃x (P (x) ∧ ¬Q(x))
are logically equivalent.

Quantifiers
Example
Solution:
¬ (∀x (P (x) → Q(x)))

Quantifiers
Example
Solution:
¬ (∀x (P (x) → Q(x))) ≡ ∃x ¬ (P (x) → Q(x))

Quantifiers
Example
Solution:
¬ (∀x (P (x) → Q(x))) ≡ ∃x ¬ (P (x) → Q(x))
≡ ∃x ¬ (¬P (x) ∨ Q(x))

Quantifiers
Example
Solution:
¬ (∀x (P (x) → Q(x))) ≡ ∃x ¬ (P (x) → Q(x))
≡ ∃x ¬ (¬P (x) ∨ Q(x))
≡ ∃x (P (x) ∧ ¬Q(x))

Quantifiers
Translating from English
“Every student in this class has taken calculus”

I If the domain is the students in this class, and C(x) means “x has
taken calculus”: ∀x C(x),

Quantifiers

I If the domain is the people in York University: ∀x (S(x) → C(x)),
where S(x) means “x is a student in this class”.

Quantifiers

“There exists a student in this class that has visited Mexico”

Quantifiers


I ∃x M (x),

Quantifiers


I ∃x M (x),
I ∃x (S(x) ∧ M (x)),

Quantifiers


I ∃x M (x),
I ∃x (S(x) ∧ M (x)),why not ∃x (S(x) → M (x)) ?

Quantifiers


I ∃x M (x),
“Every student in this class has visited Mexico or Europe”

Quantifiers


I ∃x M (x),

I ∀x (M (x) ∨ E(x)),

Quantifiers


I ∃x M (x),

I ∀x (M (x) ∨ E(x)),
I ∀x (S(x) → M (x) ∨ E(x))

Quantifiers


I ∃x M (x),

I ∀x (M (x) ∨ E(x)),
I ∀x (S(x) → M (x) ∨ E(x)) why not ∀x (S(x) ∧ (M (x) ∨ E(x)))?

Nested quantifiers
Consider he following expression:
“For every student in this class there is a pizza in the menu such that the
student likes the pizza”

Nested quantifiers
This can be expressed as

∀s (∃p L(s, p))

Nested quantifiers

∀s (∃p L(s, p))
The expression ∃p L(s, p) is a predicate that is under the scope of a

universal cuantifier.

Nested quantifiers

∀s (∃p L(s, p))

universal cuantifier. For a given s, L(s, p) determines a propositional
fomula Ls (p).

Nested quantifiers

∀s (∃p L(s, p))

universal cuantifier. For a given s, L(s, p) determines a propositional
fomula Ls (p). We usually write:
∀s ∃p L(s, p)

Nested quantifiers
Example
Consider the expression
∀x ∀y(x + y = y + x)
where the domain of both variables is the set of real numbers.

Nested quantifiers
Example
∀x ∀y(x + y = y + x)

Nested quantifiers
Example
∀x ∀y(x + y = y + x)
Example
Two numbers are additive inverse of each other if their sum is 0. How do
we write in symbols the statement “Every real number has an aditive
inverse”?

Nested quantifiers
Example
∀x ∀y(x + y = y + x)
Example
Two numbers are additive inverse of each other if their sum is 0. How do
we write in symbols the statement “Every real number has an aditive
inverse”?
∀x ∃y (x + y = 0)

Nested quantifiers
does the order matter?
Recall the example L(s, p) of the students and the pizzas, and consider
the following two expressions.
∀s∃p L(s, p) ∃p∀s L(s, p).
Are they equivalent?

Nested quantifiers
does the order matter?
Recall the example L(s, p) of the students and the pizzas, and consider
the following two expressions.
∀s∃p L(s, p) ∃p∀s L(s, p).
Are they equivalent?
No, ∀s∃p L(s, p) says that every student has a favorite pizza, whereas
∃p∀s L(s, p) says that there is a very popular kind of pizza.

Nested quantifiers
In the following examples, assume that the domain is the set of real
numbers.
∀x (x = 5)

Nested quantifiers
numbers.
∀x (x = 5) F
∃x (x = 5)

Nested quantifiers
numbers.
∀x (x = 5) F
∃x (x = 5) T
∀x∀y(x + y = 5)

Nested quantifiers
numbers.
∀x (x = 5) F
∃x (x = 5) T
∀x∀y(x + y = 5) F
∀x∃y(x + y = 5)

Nested quantifiers
numbers.
∀x (x = 5) F
∃x (x = 5) T
∀x∀y(x + y = 5) F
∀x∃y(x + y = 5) T
∃y∀y(x + y = 5)

Nested quantifiers
numbers.
∀x (x = 5) F
∃x (x = 5) T
∀x∀y(x + y = 5) F
∀x∃y(x + y = 5) T
∃y∀y(x + y = 5) F
∀x∃y∀z(x + y = z)

Nested quantifiers
numbers.
∀x (x = 5) F
∃x (x = 5) T
∀x∀y(x + y = 5) F
∀x∃y(x + y = 5) T
∃y∀y(x + y = 5) F
∀x∃y∀z(x + y = z) F
∀x∀z∃y(x + y = z)

Nested quantifiers
numbers.
∀x (x = 5) F
∃x (x = 5) T
∀x∀y(x + y = 5) F
∀x∃y(x + y = 5) T
∃y∀y(x + y = 5) F
∀x∃y∀z(x + y = z) F
∀x∀z∃y(x + y = z) T

Nested quantifiers
“The sum of two positive integers is positive”:

Nested quantifiers
∀x∀y ((x > 0) ∧ (y > 0) → x + y > 0) .

Nested quantifiers
∀x∀y ((x > 0) ∧ (y > 0) → x + y > 0) .
“Given any number, there is a number greater than it”:

Nested quantifiers
∀x∀y ((x > 0) ∧ (y > 0) → x + y > 0) .
∀x∃y(y > x).

Nested quantifiers
∀x∀y ((x > 0) ∧ (y > 0) → x + y > 0) .
∀x∃y(y > x).
“Every non-zero number has a multiplicative inverse”:

Nested quantifiers
∀x∀y ((x > 0) ∧ (y > 0) → x + y > 0) .
∀x∃y(y > x).
∀x ((x 6= 0) → ∃y(xy = 1)) .

Nested quantifiers
∀x∀y ((x > 0) ∧ (y > 0) → x + y > 0) .
∀x∃y(y > x).
∀x ((x 6= 0) → ∃y(xy = 1)) .

Nested quantifiers
Example
Let the set of all the students of MATH1190 the domain of the variable x.
Let C(x) be the statement “x has a computer” and let F (x, y) be “x and
y are friends”. Translate the statement to English:
∀x (C(x) ∨ ∃y(C(y) ∧ F (x, y)))

Nested quantifiers
Example
Let the set of all the students of MATH1190 the domain of the variable x.
Let C(x) be the statement “x has a computer” and let F (x, y) be “x and
y are friends”. Translate the statement to English:
∀x (C(x) ∨ ∃y(C(y) ∧ F (x, y)))
Solution: “Every student of MATH1190 either has a computer or has a

friend who has a computer”.

Nested quantifiers
Example

∃x∀y∀z (F (x, y) ∧ F (x, z) ∧ (y 6= z)) → ¬F (y, z)

Nested quantifiers
Example

∃x∀y∀z (F (x, y) ∧ F (x, z) ∧ (y 6= z)) → ¬F (y, z)
Solution: First consider the statement
(F (x, y) ∧ F (x, z) ∧ (y 6= z)) → ¬F (y, z).
This says that if y and z are different common friends of x, then they are
not friends.

Nested quantifiers
Example

∃x∀y∀z (F (x, y) ∧ F (x, z) ∧ (y 6= z)) → ¬F (y, z)
Solution: First consider the statement
(F (x, y) ∧ F (x, z) ∧ (y 6= z)) → ¬F (y, z).
This says that if y and z are different common friends of x, then they are
not friends. Then the original statement says that there is a student such
that the previous condition holds for every pair y, z. In other words, there
is a student whose friends are not friends of each other.

Nested quantifiers
Example
Translate the sentence “If a person is female and is a parent, then this
person is somebody’s mother”

Nested quantifiers
Example
Translate the sentence “If a person is female and is a parent, then this
person is somebody’s mother”
Solution: Consider the predicates F (x): “x is female”, P (x): “x is a

parent” and M (x, y): “x is the mother of y”. Then the statement is
∀x ((F (x) ∧ P (x)) → ∃yM (x, y)) .

Nested quantifiers
Example
Express the statement “Everyone has exactly one best friend” using
B(x, y): “x is best friend of y”

Nested quantifiers
Example
Express the statement “Everyone has exactly one best friend” using
B(x, y): “x is best friend of y”
Solution:

∀x ∃y B(x, y) ∧ ∀z ((y 6= z) → ¬B(x, z))

Nested quantifiers
Negating nested quantifiers
Example
Compute the negation of (∀x∃y(xy = 1)).

Nested quantifiers
Example
Solution:
¬(∀x∃y(xy = 1))

Nested quantifiers
Example
Solution:
¬(∀x∃y(xy = 1)) ≡ ∃x¬(∃y(xy = 1))

Nested quantifiers
Example
Solution:
¬(∀x∃y(xy = 1)) ≡ ∃x¬(∃y(xy = 1))
≡ ∃x∀y¬(xy = 1)

Nested quantifiers
Example
Solution:
¬(∀x∃y(xy = 1)) ≡ ∃x¬(∃y(xy = 1))
≡ ∃x∀y¬(xy = 1)
≡ ∃x∀y(xy 6= 1)

Propositional Logic, Predicates and Quantifiers: Antonio Montero

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Propositional Logic, Predicates and Quantifiers: Antonio Montero

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1.

Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 1 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 2 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 3 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 3 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 3 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 3 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 3 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 3 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 3 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 3 / 59

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

Example: are the following sentences propositions?

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 4 / 59

We use Propositional Variables: p, q, r . . .

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 5 / 59

We use Propositional Variables: p, q, r . . .

If a proposition is true we say that its truth-value is “true” (or T).

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 5 / 59

We use Propositional Variables: p, q, r . . .

If a proposition is true we say that its truth-value is “true” (or T).

Similarly, if a proposition is false we say that its truth-value is “false”

A. Montero (YorkU) 1. Propositional logic, predicates and quantifiers Math 1190 5 / 59

We use Propositional Variables: p, q, r . . .

If a proposition is true we say that its truth-value is “true” (or T).

Similarly, if a proposition is false we say that its truth-value is “false”

If a proposition that cannot be expressed in terms of simpler