Math 2.0

statement theorem

Negation of an existential statement

Statement

Let XX be a set and let P(x)P(x) be a predicate on XX. The negation of ∃x∈X, P(x)\exists x \in X, \, P(x) is logically equivalent to ∀x∈X, ¬P(x)\forall x \in X, \, \neg P(x). ¬(∃x∈X, P(x))≡∀x∈X, ¬P(x)\neg \bigl( \exists x \in X, \, P(x) \bigr) \equiv \forall x \in X, \, \neg P(x)

Remarks

This equivalence is valid in intuitionistic logic as well as in classical logic. Together with the negation of a universal statement, it gives a rule. To negate a quantified statement, swap each ∀\forall and ∃\exists and negate the predicate.

Explanations

L1 human

"No student failed" means "every student did not fail". To deny that some element has a property, you must show that each element lacks it.

What this node needs for W1
  • an inventory row: the row of the inventory that the node accounts for (0 of 1)

The writing levels say how complete the text of a node is. They do not measure its truth.

What this needs

To read this node, read these 6 nodes in this order. The foundations come first, and the list ends with this node.

Each node uses the nodes above it. The colour of the bar on a box shows the evidence level, and the box also gives it as text. The list below has the same nodes.
  • no evidence level
  1. Proposition concept
  2. Negation definition
  3. Predicate definition
  4. Existential quantifier definition
  5. Universal quantifier definition
  6. Negation of an existential statement statement

Sources

  1. Web https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantifier_(logic), lead section