Hi everyone,
The review sheet for the final exam has been posted under Classroom Resources / Exam Reviews. As always, let me know in person, by email, or here on the OpenLab if you have any questions.
Regards,
Prof. Reitz
Category: Announcements (Page 1 of 2)
Hi everyone,
The grades for Exam #3 are posted under Dashboard / OpenLab Gradebook – the exams will be returned on Tuesday. Let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Prof. Reitz
Written work, due Tuesday, December 3rd, in class:
Chapter 10 p167: 1, 2, 5, 10, 15
WeBWorK – none
OpenLab – none
Project – Final Draft of paper due in class on Thursday, 12/5.
Group Presentations on Thursday, 12/5.
Hi everyone,
The review sheet for Exam #3, taking place on Tuesday 11/26, is posted under Classroom Resources / Exam Reviews. As always, if you have any questions or notice any errors please let me know (by email, in person, or here on the OpenLab).
Best,
Prof. Reitz
Hi everyone,
Your Midsemester Grades (including your grades for Exam #2) are posted on the OpenLab Gradebook (Dashboard / OpenLab Gradebook). You will see that your grades for Exam #2 as well as your current Homework, OpenLab, and Project grades have been posted.
Your Midsemester grade is based on the following work completed so far:
Homework 30%, OpenLab 25%, Exams 45%
Midterm grade key:P: passing/satisfactory progress; likely to complete course requirements.U: failing/unsatisfactory progress; not likely to complete course requirements.BL: borderline; barely passing or just below passing; there is a reasonable expectation that the student will pass the courseSA: stopped attending; for students who were attending (at least once) and have now have stopped attending your class.WN grade: Student never attended. Do not assign this grade. This information was based on the “ verification of attendance” (VOA) roster you submitted at the 3rd week of the semester.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Prof. Reitz
Written work, Due Thursday, October 17th, in class:
Chapter 4 p.100: 1, 6, 7, 15, 16
Odd problems are worth 4 points, even problems worth 8 points.
WeBWorK – none
OpenLab – OpenLab #5 Due Thursday 10/24. NOTE: Please complete the writing portion on the OpenLab, but bring your Conjecture to class on 10/24 (do not post your Conjecture to the OpenLab)
Hi everyone,
Just a heads up – the fifth WeBWorK assignment is now available, due this Thursday 10/10 at midnight.
Best,
Prof. Reitz
You will have 45 minutes to complete the exam, ending at ___
You may use: pen/pencil. NO: Scratch paper, phones, laptops, tablets, ec.
Please spread out as much as possible in the room.
The first exam will take place on Thursday, September 26. The review sheet is posted under “Classroom Resources/Exam Reviews” – it is the same as last year’s Exam #1 Review. Please let me know if you have any questions, or to report an error.
Regards,
Prof. Reitz
Logic on Math StackExchange
- Non-termination proof for all non-terminating algorithms? July 26, 2024Let Alg be the set of all algorithms (TM descriptions/ python code, etc.). This set is countably infinite. In classical logic, the following statement is provable: HaltOrNotHalt == ∀ alg ∈ Alg : Halts(alg) ∨ DoesNotHalt(alg) where the predicates are defined as follows: Halts(alg) == ∃step:Nat, RunFor(step, alg) = 'halt' DoesNotHalt(alg) == ∀step:Nat, RunFor(step, alg) […]Suraaj K S
- Question regarding Fitch's paradox of knowability July 26, 2024Section 2 of Fitch's paradox of knowability states the following. Let $K$ be the epistemic operator 'it is known by someone at some time that.’ Let $\diamond$ be the modal operator ‘it is possible that’. Suppose the knowability principle (KP)—that all truths are knowable by somebody at some time: $$\text{(KP)} \qquad\qquad \forall p(p\rightarrow \diamond Kp).$$ […]Hans
- Constructive proofs and terminating algorithms July 26, 2024I was thinking about the following judgement: ¬ ∀n:Nat ¬ϕ(n) ⊢ ∃n:Nat ϕ(n) I am not sure whether this can be proven constructively, because intuitively, it doesn't look like I can find a 'witness' n such that ϕ(n). However, we do seem to have an algorithm that can generate witnesses given the premise, because I […]Suraaj K S
- Help for inventing Hilbert-style deduction system for a language containing many logical connectives and quantifiers July 26, 2024The challenge is the following: Create a formal deduction system consisting of Modus Ponens (MP) as the sole inference rule for a language containing the following symbols: ¬ (not) ∧ (and) ∨ (or) → (implies) ↔ (iff) ← (is implied by) ∃ (there exists) ∀ (for all) ↑ (nand) ↓ (nor) ̸→ (doesn't imply) ̸↔ […]Nuno Ricardo Serafim
- Distribution of Universal Quantifiers when arbitrariness is implied July 26, 2024I want to prove that $B \setminus \cup_{i \in I} A_i ) = \cap_{i \in I} (B \setminus A_i )$ supposing that B is a set, $\{A_i | i \in I \}$ is an indexed family of sets, and $I \neq \emptyset$ . I want to do the proof like that: $$ x \in B […]Alex Pi
- Transitivity of subset relation (proof using hypothetical syllogism). July 25, 2024This question is about a comparatively formal approach to a simple theorem. The theorem says, If $ A\subseteq B$ and $ B\subseteq C$ then, $ A\subseteq C$. Symbolically, $ (A\subseteq B\land B\subseteq C)\implies A\subseteq C$. Most probably we can use the hypothetical syllogism $ (A\implies B\land B\implies C) \implies (A\implies C)$ concept and prove it. […]Mystic mystic
- If $A\Rightarrow B$, how does $\bar{A}$ say nothing about B? [closed] July 25, 2024I'm reading Probability Theory by E.T. Jaynes and in the first chapter on plausible reasoning, he states The proposition $A\Rightarrow B$ does not assert that either A or B is true; it means only that $A\bar{B}$ is false, or, what is the same thing, ($\bar{A}$ + B) is true ... On the other hand, if […]Jon Behnken
- Deduction construction examples in Kleene's "Introduction to Metamathematics" July 25, 2024The deductions for construction proposed to readers seam to be pretty easy, but I'm not quite sure in my solution. I'm talking about the example 2 in §20. The first one is to construct $A\&B$ from $A$ and $B$ (I will use $\Rightarrow$ instead of $\supset$ because it is less confusing). $A$ is given. $B$ […]dragondangun
- Can the consistency of a complete recursively axiomatizable be decided? July 25, 2024It's known that the theorems of a complete, recursively axiomatizable theory $T$ must be decidable. Enderton proved this in his Corollary 25G by considering whether $T$ is consistent (Enderton's definition of completeness allows inconsistent theories to be complete): if it's consistent, we can search the proof for $p$ and $\neg p$ in parallel and eventually […]staroperator
- formal proof to truth table proof [closed] July 24, 2024I'm trying to give my question more clarity. I don't know how to define a "formal proof", but this example will bring some clarity: https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mulsucdiv2z.html By a truth table proof I mean a proof given using truth tables (as is a first course in logic for undergraduates. See for example, here: https://sites.millersville.edu/bikenaga/math-proof/truth-tables/truth-tables.html I want know […]Mike
Recent Comments