Why is this proof of False in the Calculus of Constructions not valid?

55 Views Asked by At

So, this would be a definition of False in the Calculus of Constructions:

$$\bot = \forall x : \mathbf P . x$$

And, according to Wikipedia, this is an inference rule:

$${\Gamma \vdash A : K \qquad \Gamma , x : A \vdash B : L} \over {\Gamma \vdash (\forall x : A . B) : L}$$

Wouldn't this imply the following:

$$(\forall x : \bot . x) : \bot$$

Obviously this can't be the case, as this would provide a proof of $\bot$. Why is this proof incorrect though?

Additional context: I'm writing an automated proof checker and the above term proves False, which makes the program useless since it results in inconsistent logic.