proof that and are consequence operators
The proof that the operators and defined in the secondexample of section 3 of theparent entry (http://planetmath.org/ConsequenceOperator) are consequence operatorsis a relatively straightforward matter of checking that they satisfy the defining properties given there. For convenience, those definitions arereproduced here.
Definition 1.
Given a set and two elements, and , of this set, thefunction is defined as follows:
Theorem 1.
For every choice of two elements, and , of a given set , thefunction is a consequence operator.
Proof.
Property 1:Since is a subset of itself and of , it follows that in either case.
Property 2:We consider two cases. If , then , so
If , then
Again, since , we alsohave , so
So, in both cases, we find that
Property 3:Suppose that and are subsets of and that is a subsetof . Then there are three possibilities:
1. and
In this case, we have and, so .
2. but
In this case, and . Since implies , we have.
3. and
In this case, and . Since implies , we have.
∎
Definition 2.
Given a set and two elements, and , of this set, thefunction is defined as follows:
Theorem 2.
For every choice of two elements, and , of a given set , thefunction is a consequence operator.
Proof.
Property 1:Since is a subset of itself and of , it follows that in either case.
Property 2:We consider two cases. If , then
If , then we note that, because, we must have whether or not , so
Property 3:Suppose that and are subsets of and that is a subsetof . Then there are three possibilities:
1. and
In this case, we have and. Since implies, we have .
2. but
In this case, and .Since implies , we have.
3. and
In this case, and ,so .∎