On Page 52, A Mathematical Introduction to Logic, Herbert B. Enderton(2ed),
Show that $\{\lnot, \# \}$ is not complete.
A set of connective symbols is complete, if every function $G : \{F, T\}^n \to \{F, T\}$for $n > 1$ can be
realized by a wff(well-formed formula) using only the connective symbols from it. A known fact is the set $\{\lnot, \land \}$ is complete.
$\#$ is a three-place sentential connective. For three arbitary wffs, $A$, $B$ and $C$, $\#ABC$ is tautologically equilvalent to:
$$(A\land B)\lor(A\land C)\lor(B\land C)$$
Here's how far I understand:
The problem can be reduced to showing, given two wffs $A$ and $B$, there is nothing tautologically equivalent to $A \land B$ by using $\lnot$ and $\# $. For simplicity, assume $A$ and $B$ are not generated by any other wffs and there exist a finite number of wffs $\{ C_i:i \leq n\}$which are not generated by other wffs either.
If the tautogocial equilvalent of $A \land B$ exists, I can't exclude the occurence of $C_i$.
I'm also trying to use induction, but I got stuck when $C_i$s are involved.
Best Answer
Peter Smith’s approach is probably the best way to think about such problems in general. In this case there’s another fairly simple approach. Notice first that the connective $\#$ is symmetric in its three arguments: if $XYZ$ is any permutation of $ABC$, $\#ABC$ is equivalent to $\#XYZ$. From this it’s easy to see that all combinations of exactly two sentence letters $A$ and $B$ with $\#$ are equivalent either to $\#AAB$ or to $\#ABB$. Moreover, $\#AAB$ is equivalent simply to $A$, and $\#ABB$ to $B$; this suggests trying to show that as long as we work with at most two sentence letters, $\#$ essentially does nothing.
Since $A\land B$ is not equivalent to $A,B,\neg A$, or $\neg B$, $\{\neg,\#\}$ is not complete.
(I’ve implicitly used the fact that if $\psi_0,\psi_1$, and $\psi_2$ are equivalent to $\psi_0',\psi_1'$, and $\psi_2'$, respectively, then $\#\psi_0\psi_1\psi_2$ is equivalent to $\#\psi_0'\psi_1'\psi_2'$. This is clear from consideration of the relevant truth tables.)