Is $ \forall x \in \emptyset. (P(x) \land \lnot P(x)) $ true?

The formula is equivalent to :

$\forall x \ (x \in \emptyset \to (P(x) \land \lnot P(x)))$.

Thus, it is TRUE,because $x \in \emptyset$ is always FALSE and the truth table for the conditional has that :

FALSE $\to$ FALSE is TRUE.

See also Vacuous truth :

a statement that asserts that all members of the empty set have a certain property.


It's a true statement.

Your statement is a universal statement, so to verify it, you can think of it as 'lining up' all objects to which the statement pertains, and checking whether they have the indicated property. So, for example, if your domain consists of two objects $a$ and $b$, then verifying the claim that all objects have property $P$ amounts to verifying that both $a$ and $b$ have property $P$.

Ok, but what if your domain is empty (as in your case)? Well, then the verification is trivial: Yes, 'all' (zero!) objects have the property $P$.

Here is another way to think about it: what would make a universal claim false? Well, the claim is false when you find some object that does not have property $P$ ... but if you find no such counterexamples, then the claim is true. Having no objects in your domain, however, means that there can be no counterexamples, so no matter what $P$ is, even if (as in your case) it expresses something impossible.

Consider this somewhat more concrete example:

"Every time I played the lottery, I won the jackpot!"

Huh! Am I a very lucky person? Well, consider the fact that actually I have never played the lottery ... does that make the statement true? Yes! All zero times that I played the lottery, I won the jackpot! Again, think of it as 'lining up' all points in time when I played the lottery and verifying that at all those times I won the jackpot. Well, given that there are no such points in time where I played the lottery, this verification is trivial: yes, it checks out!

Or, in terms of counterexamples: there is no point in time where i played the lottery and did not win the jackpot. So, the claim checks out and is therefore true.

Of course, it is also true that all zero times I played the lottery, I did not win the jackpot. So, all zero times that I played the lottery, I did win the jackpot as well as did not win the jackpot ... which is just like your statement.

Tags:

Logic

Predicate Logic

Related

Riemann integral on a single point Proving $\lim_{x \to 0+} \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^n}{n!^x} = \frac{1}{2}$ Show that $\int_0^1 4 \space\operatorname{li}(x)^3 \space (x-1) \space x^{-3} dx = \zeta(3) $ How does linear algebra over the octonions and other division algebras work? Number of surjective functions from a set with $m$ elements onto a set with $n$ elements Degrees of Freedom in Affine Transformation and Homogeneous Transformation Given a matrix $A$ find $A^n$. Is there a scalar product s.t. the following list is orthogonal? Proving that the derivative always diverges faster than the original function What is the rigorous definition of $dy$ and $dx$? On the integrals $\int_0^\infty [1-x^n \operatorname{arccot}^n(x)] \, \mathrm{d} x$ What changes for linear algebra over a finite field?

Recent Posts