Talk:Atomic formula

message: I'm not sure this shouldn't be merged into formula (mathematical logic). Is there enough to say to justify a separate article? --Trovatore 04:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: merge?

message: I think the opening definition can be improved upon. It says
"In mathematical logic, an atomic formula (also known simply as an atom) is a formula with no deeper propositional structure. Atoms are thus the simplest propositions of the logic. The well-formed formulas of the logic are formed by combining the atomic formulas using the connectives of the logic."
The expression "with no deeper propositional structure" is rather loose - at least it does not explain what is meant by "deeper propositional structure."
It says "The well-formed formulas of the logic are formed by combining the atomic formulas": this is confusing thing to say  because  atomic formulas are themselves well-formed formulas.  It would be more accurate to say "Compound formulas are formed by combining atomic formulas .."
I have suggested:
:"In Logic (propositional logic and predicate logic), an atomic formula is an expression consisting of either a sentential letter or an n-place predicate letter followed by n individual symbols or functions. If it contains no free variables it is an Atomic sentence."
An alternative would be "it is a Well-formed formula that includes no logical connectives or quantifiers."
This article should link to formula (mathematical logic),atomic sentence and Well-formed formula
Kaustuv Chaudhuri does not care for my suggestions.  Any alernative suggestions?--Philogo 21:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have incorporated what I consider to be the reasonable parts of your suggestion. The article already links to formulas and wffs in the text; see-also sections are for other articles not directly linked. Atomic sentence as a Wikipedia article is a disgrace; ideally these two articles should be merged, but the turf wars that will result with that attempt are entirely too predictable. You might consider reading more than a single textbook on logic. I have taken the liberty of replacing your s with paragraph breaks. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 13:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

text: "In Logic (propositional logic and predicate logic), an atomic formula is an expression consisting of either a sentential letter or an n-place predicate letter followed by n individual symbols or functions. If it contains no free variables it is an Atomic sentence."
Any objections?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.226.211 (talk) 21:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: definition

message: Added new first paragrah with more precise definition--Philogo 20:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I disagree entirely with  your draft. Firstly, terms such as sentential letter, individual symbol, function, etc., which you (rather inappropriately) bolded, were nowhere defined as technical terms. Even were they to be so defined, this is a confusing definition of an otherwise trivial concept. Certain of these terms, such as sentential letter, are often idiosyncratically used by various authors of logical texts, and are possibly only relevant to Hilbert systems in any case. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 08:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Just to be clear, I meant that defining a trivial concept as atomic formula using scary sounding terminology is unnecessary. Wikipedia is not trying to be a logic textbook. Furthermore, your particular definition as "sentential letter or n-place predicate letter" commits to an unnecessarily narrow view of logic; for example, it doesn't generalize to higher-order logic, though the concept of atom would certainly apply even at higher kinds. The thing you call an alternative above is what the article presently states, with the minor (but crucial!) difference that it doesn't assume that well-formedness is already understood, and it additionally hints at the modern view of atoms as sites for substitution. The fervor for citation is well and good, but there is really no "authority" on logical syntax or terminology. Every author rolls his or her own. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 14:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: edit

message: I've been trying to make some sense out of a confusing maze of articles, such as statement (logic), sentence (mathematical logic), proposition (logic), atomic formula, atomic sentence, and more others than you can shake a stick at.
It seems to me that there should be three threads, internally consistant and at least not mutually contradictory.  The first thread is philosophy, the second elementary mathematics, and the third technical mathematics.
To that end, unless someone objects, I'm going to start moving some articles around, starting on May 29, 2008. 
Rick Norwood (talk) 12:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  She just growed. 

message: Article states: for propositional logic, for example, the atomic formulas are the propositional variables. 
I think that since logical constants, \left\{ \bot,\ \top \right\} are atomic formulas as well, this definition should be expanded to include both variables \left\{ a, b, c ... \right\} and constants \left\{ \bot,\ \top \right\}. -- Obradović Goran  (talk 15:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition for propositional logic