How to prove the formula has no finite model, thus it has no finit domain

[Mincoo13]

I am not sure how to even start solving this problem. I tried to solve it using the semantic tree, but with no success. It’s an exercise from the book Mathematical Logic for Computer Science by Mordechai Ben-Ari.
Prove that the following formula has no finite models:
∀x∃yp(x,y) ∧ ∀x¬p(x,x) ∧ ∀x∀y∀z(p(x,y)∧p(y,z)→p(x,z)).

 

[pka]

I am not sure how to even start solving this problem. I tried to solve it using the semantic tree, but with no success. It’s an exercise from the book Mathematical Logic for Computer Science by Mordechai Ben-Ari.
Prove that the following formula has no finite models:
∀x∃yp(x,y) ∧ ∀x¬p(x,x) ∧ ∀x∀y∀z(p(x,y)∧p(y,z)→p(x,z)).

Have you translated the expression?
For every x there is a y such that p(x,y), and for every x it is the case that not p(x,x), and for all x,y, &z if p(x,y) and p(y,z) then p(x,z).
Because you did not give the entire question, we don't know the universal domain, thus it is not possible to give a smooth translation.

 

[Mincoo13]

Have you translated the expression?
For every x there is a y such that p(x,y), and for every x it is the case that not p(x,x), and for all x,y, &z if p(x,y) and p(y,z) then p(x,z).
Because you did not give the entire question, we don't know the universal domain, thus it is not possible to give a smooth translation.

I gave the entire question, there’s nothing else in book, just this. And yes, I translated it, but it didn’t help me.