I am stuck at this problem:
Let $\Sigma = \{\lnot,\lor,\land,\rightarrow,\leftrightarrow,(,),P_1,...,P_n\}$ be an alphabet.
Now let's define the set of logical expressions $\mathscr{L} \subseteq \Sigma^\ast$ recursively as follows:
Rule #1: For each $i\in\{1,2,...,n\}$, $P_i\in \mathscr{L}$
Rule #2: For each $\phi \in \mathscr{L}$, $\lnot \phi \in \mathscr{L}$
Rule #3: For each $\phi,\psi \in \mathscr{L}$ and $@\in\{\lor,\land,\rightarrow,\leftrightarrow\}$, $(\phi @ \psi)\in\mathscr{L}$
No strings other than those derived from Rules #1, #2 and #3 are in $\mathscr{L}$.
Prove that for all $\phi \in \mathscr{L}$ and $\psi\in\Sigma^\ast$, If $(\phi\land\psi)\in\mathscr{L}$ Then it must be the case that $\psi\in\mathscr{L}$.
I tried to prove it using structural induction, contradiction and several other ways but I wasn't able to prove it.
Thanks for any help.
Hint
We have to take into account the difference between the set $\mathscr L$ of logical expressions (the well-formed formulae) and the set $\Sigma^*$ of strings.
The string $P_1 \to P_2$ is a logical expression, while the string $\land P_1$ is not.
The "closure" condition following the three rules guarantees that only strings built-up from the $P_i$ following the three rules is a logical expressions.
It can be equivalently expressed as :
Thus, the approach "by contradiction" is the right one; we will assume that :
Consider the set $X = \mathscr L − \{ (\phi \land \psi) \}$; we have that $P_i \in X$ and that if $\sigma \in X$, then $\lnot \sigma \in X$; thus, rules 1 and 2 are satisfied by $X$.
Consider now $\sigma_1, \sigma_2 \in X$; then $\sigma_1, \sigma_2 \in \mathscr L$ and thus, by rule 3 : $(\sigma_1 \land \sigma_2) \in \mathscr L$.
But the string $(\sigma_1 \land \sigma_2)$ is different from the string $(\phi \land \psi)$; it is enough to compare them and we have to conclude that the only way they can be equal (as strings) is when $\sigma_1 = \phi$ and $\sigma_2 = \psi$, and this is not possible, because $\sigma_2 \in \mathscr L$ and we have assumed that $\psi \notin \mathscr L$.
Thus, $(\sigma_1 \land \sigma_2) \in X$ and also rule 3 is satisfied by $X$.
But then $X$ satisfy rules 1,2,3 and this contradicts the "closure" condition, i.e. the fact that $\mathscr L$ is the smallest set of strings on the alphabet that satisfy the rules.