Set Theory and Logic

   

Shortest Refutation of Prenex Normal Form

Authors: Colin James III

The implication rule for removing quantifiers from the antecedent of (∃xϕ)→ψ as equivalent to ∀x(ϕ→ψ), and the implication rule for removing quantifiers from the consequent of ϕ→(∃xψ) as equivalent to ∃x(ϕ→ψ), are not tautologous and hence refute the prenex normal form.

Comments: 1 Page. Copyright © 2018 by Colin James III All rights reserved. Note that comments on Disqus are not forwarded or read, so respond to this author's email address: info@ersatz-systems dot com .

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2018-07-27 10:42:14

Unique-IP document downloads: 4 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus