Assuming no previous study in logic, this informal yet rigorous text covers the material of a standard undergraduate first course in mathematical. From this perspective the principal asset of Chiswell and Hodges’ book For a senior seminar or a reading course in logic (but not set theory). Maybe I understand it now Your concern is right: what the exercise proves is something like: if Γ ⊢ ϕ, then Γ [ r / y ] ⊢ ϕ [ r / y ],. i.e. every occurrence of.
|Published (Last):||15 June 2004|
|PDF File Size:||20.79 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||20.80 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The book defines LR as a “language of relations”. I interpret the question above as follows. After struggling to prove the result, I looked at the solution on page Hpdges clarity, this is the proposition that I think the solution is proving:.
Mathematical Logic – Hardcover – Ian Chiswell; Wilfrid Hodges – Oxford University Press
For clarity, this is the proposition that I think the solution is proving: Is the wording of this exercise clear? Is there a better wording that might help me understand it better? Response to your second question given in an edit. Maybe I understand it now Your concern matbematical right: Thus, working upside-down, we have the new tree: Would loglc say that your example given here is a counterexample to the proposition the exercise asks us to prove?
Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook.
Sign up using Email and Password. Post as a guest Name.
Chiswell & Hodges: Mathematical Logic – Logic MattersLogic Matters