I try proving the non-derivability of $(p\to q) \to \lnot p \lor q$, using the of the kripke model. I tried using different combinations of $Wi$, but I get fail.
2026-03-25 01:12:04.1774401124
On
Proving the non-derivability of formula using the of the kripke model
199 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
2
There are 2 best solutions below
1
On
I think that
$$w_o \to w_1 : p,q$$
will suffice.
Consider : $p \rightarrow q$.
We have that $V(p,w_1)=1=V(q,w_1)$; thus, it is true that :
if $V(p,w)$ then $V(q, w')$ for every $w' \ge w$,
i.e. $w_0 \Vdash p \rightarrow q$.
But $V(\lnot p, w_0)=0$, because $V(\lnot p, w)=1$ iff $V(p, w')=0$ for all $w' \ge w$, and $V(q, w_0)=0$.
Thus, $V(\lnot p \lor q, w_0)=max (V(\lnot p,w_0), V(q,w_0))=0$; thus :
$w_0 \nVdash \lnot p \lor q$.
You need a world $w_1$ where $(p\to q)\to(\neg p \lor q)$ is not satisfied. In other words $w_2$ needs to have at least one successor $w_2$ that satisfies $p\to q$ but neither $\neg p$ nor $q$.
The way for $w_2$ not to satisfy $\neg p\equiv p\to \bot$ is for it to have a successor $w_3$ that satisfies $p$ but not $\bot$. This is true if only $p$ is true in $w_3$. On the other hand, since $w_2$ must satisfy $p\to q$, we must then also have that $q$ is true in $w_3$.
This suggests a Kripke frame with three worlds $w_1<w_2<w_3$ where $w_3$ asserts both $p$ and $q$, but $w_1$ and $w_2$ assert neither.
(Actually $w_1$ is superfluous here; we can take $w_1=w_2$ instead).