Which one of the following predicate formulae is NOT logically valid?

Note that W is a predicate formula without any free occurrence of x.

Consider the first order predicate formula φ:

∀x[(∀z z|x ⇒ ((z = x) ∨ (z = 1))) ⇒ ∃w (w > x) ∧ (∀z z|w ⇒ ((w = z) ∨ (z = 1)))]

Here 'a|b' denotes that 'a divides b', where a and b are integers.

Consider the following sets:

S1. {1, 2, 3, ..., 100}
S2. Set of all positive integers
S3. Set of all integers

Which of the above sets satisfy φ?

Consider the first-order logic sentence
$$\varphi \equiv \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\exists s\exists t\exists u\forall v\forall w$$ $$\forall x\forall y\psi \left( {s,t,u,v,w,x,y} \right)$$
where $$\psi $$ $$(𝑠,𝑡, 𝑢, 𝑣, 𝑤, 𝑥, 𝑦)$$ is a quantifier-free first-order logic formula using only predicate symbols, and possibly equality, but no function symbols. Suppose $$\varphi $$ has a model with a universe containing $$7$$ elements.

Which one of the following statements is necessarily true?

Which one of the following well-formed formulae in predicate calculus is NOT valid?