Lecture 4 Notes

# Inductive hypothesis so i b cor 334 b is closed

This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: > 0 connectives/quantifiers, and for every closed wf W shorter than A, T W iff I W. Case 1: A has form (∼B), for B closed and shorter than A. 1. "⇒". Supppose T A. (i.e., T ∼B) Then: T B. (T is consistent.) Hence: I B. (Inductive Hypothesis.) So: I ∼B. (Cor. 3.34, B is closed.) Thus I A. 2. "⇐". Suppose I A. (i.e., I ∼B) Then: I B. (Cor. 3.34, B is closed.) So: T B. (Inductive Hypothesis.) So: T ∼B. (T is complete.) Thus T A. Case 2: A has form (B → C), for B, C closed and shorter than A. 1. "⇒". Suppose I A. Then: I B and I ∼C. So: T B and T C. (Inductive Hypothesis.) So: T B and T ∼C. (T is complete.) Note: T (B → (∼C → ∼(B → C))). (Tautology of L, hence L. Thus theorem of T.) So: T ∼(B → C). So T ∼A. Thus: T A. (T is consistent.) 2. "⇐". Suppose T A. Then: T ∼A. (T is complete.) Or T ∼(B → C). Note: T ∼(B → C) → B and T ∼(B → C) → ∼C. (Tautologies of L, hence theorems of T.) So: T B an...
View Full Document

## This document was uploaded on 03/25/2014 for the course PL 3014 at NYU Poly.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online