The intuitive notion behind the usual semantics of most systems of modal logic is that of ?possible worlds?. Loosely speaking, an expression is necessary if and only if it holds in all possible worlds; it is possible if and only if it holds in some possible world. Of course, contradictory expressions turn out to hold in no possible worlds, and logically true expressions turn out to hold in every possible world. A method is presented for transforming standard modal systems into (...) systems of modal logic for impossible worlds. To each possible world there corresponds an impossible world such that an expression holds in the impossible world if and only if it does not hold in the possible world. One can then talk about such worlds quite consistently, and there seems to be no logical reason for excluding them from consideration. (shrink)

There are simple, purely syntactic axiomatic proof systems for both the logical truths and the logical falsehoods of propositional logic. However, to date no such system has been developed for the logical contingencies, that is, formulas that are both satisfiable and falsifiable. This paper formalizes the purely syntactic axiomatic proof systems for the logical contingencies and proves its soundness as well as completeness.