I was wondering if someone could help me prove this theorem in propositional logic:
Let $F \equiv G$. Show: if $F'$ and $G'$ are obtained from $F$ respectively $G$ by substituting all occurrences of $\lor$ by $\land$ (and vice versa) then $F' \equiv G'$.
My latest approach has been to formulate it for induction as:
For every formula $F$: For every formula $G$: If $F \equiv G$ and $F'$ and $G'$ are obtained from $F$ respectively $G$ by substituting all occurrences of $\lor$ by $\land$ (and vice versa) then $F' \equiv G'$.
Let $F$ be an arbitrary formula.
Let $G$ be an atomic formula. Prove: If $G \equiv F$ then $G' \equiv F'$, Since $G'$ is $G$: Prove: If $G \equiv F$ then $G \equiv F'$.
Let $H$ be such that if $H \equiv F$ then $H' \equiv F'$. Prove: If $\lnot H \equiv F$ then $(\lnot H)' \equiv F'$. Since $(\lnot H)'$ is $\lnot H'$: Prove: If $\lnot H \equiv F$ then $\lnot H' \equiv F'$.
Let $H_{1}$ be such that if $H_{1} \equiv F$ then $H_{1}' \equiv F'$. Let $H_{2}$ be such that if $H_{2} \equiv F$ then $H_{2}' \equiv F'$.
Prove: If $(H_{1} \lor H_{2}) \equiv F$ then $(H_{1} \lor H_{2})' \equiv F'$. Since $(H_{1} \lor H_{2})'$ is $(H_{1}' \land H_{2}')$: Prove: If $(H_{1} \lor H_{2}) \equiv F$ then $(H_{1}' \land H_{2}') \equiv F'$.
Prove: If $(H_{1} \land H_{2}) \equiv F$ then $(H_{1} \land H_{2})' \equiv F'$. Since $(H_{1} \land H_{2})'$ is $(H_{1}' \lor H_{2}')$: Prove: If $(H_{1} \land H_{2}) \equiv F$ then $(H_{1}' \lor H_{2}') \equiv F'$.
I am not certain that I have set this up correctly and I have also not been able to prove the subsequent steps. It may be that this is not the best approach?
Something to check (I should comment but I currently can't :| ):
$F\equiv G$ means $F$ is semantically equivalent to $G$, i.e. $F\vDash G$ and $G\vDash F$, i.e. for all valuation $v$, $v(F)=v(G)$, right?
The only logical connectives occurring in $F$ and $G$ are $\neg,\vee,\wedge$, right (otherwise let $F=p\to q,G=\neg p \vee q$, we have $F\equiv G$ but $F'\not\equiv G'$)?
Your approach of using structural induction on the main connectives of $F$ and $G$ is right, but seems haven't cover all cases.