Prove that ${H_1,dots,H_k} models F$ if and only if $(H_1 land dots land H_k) rightarrow F$ is tautology












1












$begingroup$


Assume that $H,F$ are formulas. How to prove that ${H_1,dots,H_k} models F$ if and only if $(H_1 land dots land H_k) rightarrow F$ is tautology. My intuition is that's right, but I don't know how to prove this in a clean and precise manner.



Definition $models$: $ H models F$ means that every interpretation suitable for both $H$ and $F$, which is a model for $H$ is also a model for $F$.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Is it propositional logic? How is $models$ defined?
    $endgroup$
    – Berci
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:28










  • $begingroup$
    @Berci I added my definition.
    $endgroup$
    – heaig
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Consider the simple case of $k=2$. If $(H_1 land H_2) to F$ is taut, this means that the formula is true for every truth assignment. Thus, what happens with a truth assignment that satisfies $(H_1 land H_2)$ ?
    $endgroup$
    – Mauro ALLEGRANZA
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:39
















1












$begingroup$


Assume that $H,F$ are formulas. How to prove that ${H_1,dots,H_k} models F$ if and only if $(H_1 land dots land H_k) rightarrow F$ is tautology. My intuition is that's right, but I don't know how to prove this in a clean and precise manner.



Definition $models$: $ H models F$ means that every interpretation suitable for both $H$ and $F$, which is a model for $H$ is also a model for $F$.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Is it propositional logic? How is $models$ defined?
    $endgroup$
    – Berci
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:28










  • $begingroup$
    @Berci I added my definition.
    $endgroup$
    – heaig
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Consider the simple case of $k=2$. If $(H_1 land H_2) to F$ is taut, this means that the formula is true for every truth assignment. Thus, what happens with a truth assignment that satisfies $(H_1 land H_2)$ ?
    $endgroup$
    – Mauro ALLEGRANZA
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:39














1












1








1





$begingroup$


Assume that $H,F$ are formulas. How to prove that ${H_1,dots,H_k} models F$ if and only if $(H_1 land dots land H_k) rightarrow F$ is tautology. My intuition is that's right, but I don't know how to prove this in a clean and precise manner.



Definition $models$: $ H models F$ means that every interpretation suitable for both $H$ and $F$, which is a model for $H$ is also a model for $F$.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Assume that $H,F$ are formulas. How to prove that ${H_1,dots,H_k} models F$ if and only if $(H_1 land dots land H_k) rightarrow F$ is tautology. My intuition is that's right, but I don't know how to prove this in a clean and precise manner.



Definition $models$: $ H models F$ means that every interpretation suitable for both $H$ and $F$, which is a model for $H$ is also a model for $F$.







logic






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 1 '18 at 14:39







heaig

















asked Dec 1 '18 at 14:23









heaigheaig

62




62












  • $begingroup$
    Is it propositional logic? How is $models$ defined?
    $endgroup$
    – Berci
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:28










  • $begingroup$
    @Berci I added my definition.
    $endgroup$
    – heaig
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Consider the simple case of $k=2$. If $(H_1 land H_2) to F$ is taut, this means that the formula is true for every truth assignment. Thus, what happens with a truth assignment that satisfies $(H_1 land H_2)$ ?
    $endgroup$
    – Mauro ALLEGRANZA
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:39


















  • $begingroup$
    Is it propositional logic? How is $models$ defined?
    $endgroup$
    – Berci
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:28










  • $begingroup$
    @Berci I added my definition.
    $endgroup$
    – heaig
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Consider the simple case of $k=2$. If $(H_1 land H_2) to F$ is taut, this means that the formula is true for every truth assignment. Thus, what happens with a truth assignment that satisfies $(H_1 land H_2)$ ?
    $endgroup$
    – Mauro ALLEGRANZA
    Dec 1 '18 at 14:39
















$begingroup$
Is it propositional logic? How is $models$ defined?
$endgroup$
– Berci
Dec 1 '18 at 14:28




$begingroup$
Is it propositional logic? How is $models$ defined?
$endgroup$
– Berci
Dec 1 '18 at 14:28












$begingroup$
@Berci I added my definition.
$endgroup$
– heaig
Dec 1 '18 at 14:39




$begingroup$
@Berci I added my definition.
$endgroup$
– heaig
Dec 1 '18 at 14:39




1




1




$begingroup$
Consider the simple case of $k=2$. If $(H_1 land H_2) to F$ is taut, this means that the formula is true for every truth assignment. Thus, what happens with a truth assignment that satisfies $(H_1 land H_2)$ ?
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 1 '18 at 14:39




$begingroup$
Consider the simple case of $k=2$. If $(H_1 land H_2) to F$ is taut, this means that the formula is true for every truth assignment. Thus, what happens with a truth assignment that satisfies $(H_1 land H_2)$ ?
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 1 '18 at 14:39










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

Note that you can write "$X$ is a tautology" as "$emptysetmodels X$", with the empty set of preconditions.



So we have:



$$emptysetmodels (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F$$



Introduce preconditions on both sides:



$${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) wedge ((H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F)$$



Simplify the implication:



$${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models F$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    To say that ${H_1,dots,H_k}models F$ is to say that there is no interpretation making all the $H_i$'s true and making $F$ false. To say that $(H_1landdotsland H_k)to F$ is tautology means, thanks to the truth table for implication, that there is no interpretation making $H_1landdotsland H_k$ true and making $F$ false. By the truth table for conjunction, these are the same.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3021402%2fprove-that-h-1-dots-h-k-models-f-if-and-only-if-h-1-land-dots-land%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      0












      $begingroup$

      Note that you can write "$X$ is a tautology" as "$emptysetmodels X$", with the empty set of preconditions.



      So we have:



      $$emptysetmodels (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F$$



      Introduce preconditions on both sides:



      $${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) wedge ((H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F)$$



      Simplify the implication:



      $${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models F$$






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        0












        $begingroup$

        Note that you can write "$X$ is a tautology" as "$emptysetmodels X$", with the empty set of preconditions.



        So we have:



        $$emptysetmodels (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F$$



        Introduce preconditions on both sides:



        $${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) wedge ((H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F)$$



        Simplify the implication:



        $${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models F$$






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          0












          0








          0





          $begingroup$

          Note that you can write "$X$ is a tautology" as "$emptysetmodels X$", with the empty set of preconditions.



          So we have:



          $$emptysetmodels (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F$$



          Introduce preconditions on both sides:



          $${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) wedge ((H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F)$$



          Simplify the implication:



          $${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models F$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Note that you can write "$X$ is a tautology" as "$emptysetmodels X$", with the empty set of preconditions.



          So we have:



          $$emptysetmodels (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F$$



          Introduce preconditions on both sides:



          $${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models (H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) wedge ((H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k) to F)$$



          Simplify the implication:



          $${H_1 wedge cdots wedge H_k} models F$$







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 1 '18 at 14:48









          orlporlp

          7,5791433




          7,5791433























              0












              $begingroup$

              To say that ${H_1,dots,H_k}models F$ is to say that there is no interpretation making all the $H_i$'s true and making $F$ false. To say that $(H_1landdotsland H_k)to F$ is tautology means, thanks to the truth table for implication, that there is no interpretation making $H_1landdotsland H_k$ true and making $F$ false. By the truth table for conjunction, these are the same.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                0












                $begingroup$

                To say that ${H_1,dots,H_k}models F$ is to say that there is no interpretation making all the $H_i$'s true and making $F$ false. To say that $(H_1landdotsland H_k)to F$ is tautology means, thanks to the truth table for implication, that there is no interpretation making $H_1landdotsland H_k$ true and making $F$ false. By the truth table for conjunction, these are the same.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  0












                  0








                  0





                  $begingroup$

                  To say that ${H_1,dots,H_k}models F$ is to say that there is no interpretation making all the $H_i$'s true and making $F$ false. To say that $(H_1landdotsland H_k)to F$ is tautology means, thanks to the truth table for implication, that there is no interpretation making $H_1landdotsland H_k$ true and making $F$ false. By the truth table for conjunction, these are the same.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  To say that ${H_1,dots,H_k}models F$ is to say that there is no interpretation making all the $H_i$'s true and making $F$ false. To say that $(H_1landdotsland H_k)to F$ is tautology means, thanks to the truth table for implication, that there is no interpretation making $H_1landdotsland H_k$ true and making $F$ false. By the truth table for conjunction, these are the same.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Dec 1 '18 at 15:05









                  Andreas BlassAndreas Blass

                  49.8k451108




                  49.8k451108






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3021402%2fprove-that-h-1-dots-h-k-models-f-if-and-only-if-h-1-land-dots-land%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Biblatex bibliography style without URLs when DOI exists (in Overleaf with Zotero bibliography)

                      ComboBox Display Member on multiple fields

                      Is it possible to collect Nectar points via Trainline?