Scribd
Upload
276 views12 pages

Logical Equivalences Note

- The document outlines logical equivalences that can be used when proving statements logically, including identity laws, domination laws, associative laws, distribution laws, De Morgan's laws, and implication/biconditional equivalences. - It explains the proof process involves stating assumptions, logical steps justified by equivalences, and concluding what was to be proved. - Examples are given of proving statements like (p∧¬q)∨q ≡ p∨q and proving statements are tautologies.

Uploaded by

Macy Tan
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
276 views12 pages

Logical Equivalences Note

- The document outlines logical equivalences that can be used when proving statements logically, including identity laws, domination laws, associative laws, distribution laws, De Morgan's laws, and implication/biconditional equivalences. - It explains the proof process involves stating assumptions, logical steps justified by equivalences, and concluding what was to be proved. - Examples are given of proving statements like (p∧¬q)∨q ≡ p∨q and proving statements are tautologies.

Uploaded by

Macy Tan
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 12

Proofs Using Logical Equivalences

Rosen 1.2

List of Logical Equivalences


pT p; pT T; pp p; (p) p pq qp; pq qp pF p pF F pp p Identity Laws Domination Laws Idempotent Laws Double Negation Law Commutative Laws

(pq) r p (qr); (pq) r p (qr) Associative Laws

List of Equivalences
p(qr) (pq)(pr) p(qr) (pq)(pr)
(pq)(p q) (pq)(p q) p p T p p F (pq) (p q) pq(pq) (qp)

Distribution Laws
De Morgans Laws Miscellaneous Or Tautology And Contradiction Implication Equivalence Biconditional Equivalence

The Proof Process


Assumptions

Logical Steps

-Definitions -Already-proved equivalences -Statements (e.g., arithmetic or algebraic)

Conclusion (That which was to be proved)

Prove: (pq) q pq
(pq) q q (pq) (qp) (q q) (qp) T qp pq Left-Hand Statement Commutative Distributive Or Tautology Identity Commutative

Begin with exactly the left-hand side statement End with exactly what is on the right Justify EVERY step with a logical equivalence

Prove: (pq) q pq
(pq) q Left-Hand Statement q (pq) Commutative (qp) (q q) Distributive Why did we need this step?
Our logical equivalence specified that is distributive on the right. This does not guarantee the equivalence works on the left!

Ex.: Matrix multiplication is not always commutative


(Note that whether or not is distributive on the left is not the point here.)

Prove: p q q p
pq p q q p (q) p q p
Contrapositive

Implication Equivalence Commutative Double Negation Implication Equivalence

Prove: p p q is a tautology
Must show that the statement is true for any value of p,q.

ppq p (p q) Implication Equivalence (p p) q Associative (p p) q Commutative Tq Or Tautology qT Commutative T Domination This tautology is called the addition rule of inference.

Why do I have to justify everything?


Note that your operation must have the same order of operands as the rule you quote unless you have already proven (and cite the proof) that order is not important.
3+4 = 4+3 3/4 4/3 A*B B*A for everything (for example, matrix multiplication)

Prove: (pq) p is a tautology


(pq) p (pq) p (pq) p (qp) p q (p p) q (p p) q T T
Implication Equivalence DeMorgans Commutative Associative Commutative Or Tautology Domination

Prove or Disprove
p q p q ??? To prove that something is not true it is enough to provide one counter-example. (Something that is true must be true in every case.) p q pq pq FT T F The statements are not logically equivalent

Prove:p q p q
p q (pq) (qp) (pq) (qp) (pq) (qp) (qp) (pq) (qp) (pq) (qp) (pq) p q
Biconditional Equivalence Implication Equivalence (x2) Double Negation Commutative Double Negation Implication Equivalence (x2) Biconditional Equivalence

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy