I'm supposed to rewrite the following english statements using predicates and quantifiers:
- If an object is black, then it is a square.
- If an object is a square, then it is above all the gray objects.
- If an object is above all the gray objects, then it is above all the triangles.
- If an object is above all the triangles, then it is above all the blue objects.
Here's my answer:
Let $O$ be the set of all objects
$\forall x \in O$ $($Black$(x)\to$ Square($x))$
$\forall x \in O$ $[$Square$(x)\to$ $(\forall y \in O($Above$(x$,Grey$(y))))]$
and so on.
My question is, for the second statement, is that way of writing ok? Or would something like
$\forall x \in O$ $[$Square$(x)\to$ $(\forall y \in O$ $($Grey$(y)$ $\to$ Above$(x,y)))]$
be clearer?
I think the last one would be a bit clearer.
The reason is: By the rules of predicate logic, you cannot insert a predicate into a predicate, unless you have defined $\text{Above}(x,\text{Grey}(y))$ as an abbreviation of $(\text{Grey}(y) \rightarrow \text{Above}(x,y))$. For example: $(\forall x \in O) P(x)$ is just an abbreviation for $\forall x( x \in O \rightarrow P(x))$.