CRN 12107: HW 1
From Classes
(Difference between revisions)
HelmutKnaust (Talk | contribs) |
HelmutKnaust (Talk | contribs) |
||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
#Use a truth table to show that $A\Rightarrow B$ is equivalent to $\neg(A \wedge \neg B)$. | #Use a truth table to show that $A\Rightarrow B$ is equivalent to $\neg(A \wedge \neg B)$. | ||
#Show that $A\vee B$ can be written using only the connectives $\neg$ and $\wedge$. | #Show that $A\vee B$ can be written using only the connectives $\neg$ and $\wedge$. | ||
− | #Thus the two connectives $\neg$ and $\wedge$ suffice to generate all compound statements. It is possible to further reduce to only one connective, albeit a different one: Let us define the new connective $\mbox{NOR}$ by setting $A \mbox{ NOR } B \Longleftrightarrow \neg(A\vee B).$ Show that the four compound statements $\neg A,\ A\vee B,\ A\wedge B$ and $A\Rightarrow B$ can be written using only | + | #Thus the two connectives $\neg$ and $\wedge$ suffice to generate all compound statements. It is possible to further reduce to only one connective, albeit a different one: Let us define the new connective $\mbox{NOR}$ by setting $A \mbox{ NOR } B \Longleftrightarrow \neg(A\vee B).$ Show that the four compound statements $\neg A,\ A\vee B,\ A\wedge B$ and $A\Rightarrow B$ can be written using only $\mbox{NOR}$-connectives. |
'''Problem 3.''' In each case, give an example, or explain why such an example | '''Problem 3.''' In each case, give an example, or explain why such an example |
Latest revision as of 15:18, 19 January 2017
Problem 1. Exercise 1.2.12(b)
Problem 2. You have seen how to generate compound statements using the four connectives $\neg, \vee, \wedge$ and $\Rightarrow$. This problem addresses the question whether all four connectives are necessary.
- Use a truth table to show that $A\Rightarrow B$ is equivalent to $\neg(A \wedge \neg B)$.
- Show that $A\vee B$ can be written using only the connectives $\neg$ and $\wedge$.
- Thus the two connectives $\neg$ and $\wedge$ suffice to generate all compound statements. It is possible to further reduce to only one connective, albeit a different one: Let us define the new connective $\mbox{NOR}$ by setting $A \mbox{ NOR } B \Longleftrightarrow \neg(A\vee B).$ Show that the four compound statements $\neg A,\ A\vee B,\ A\wedge B$ and $A\Rightarrow B$ can be written using only $\mbox{NOR}$-connectives.
Problem 3. In each case, give an example, or explain why such an example cannot exist:
- Is there a predicate $A(x,y)$ such that the statement $\forall x\ \exists y:\ A(x,y)$ is true, while the statement $\exists y\ \forall x:\ A(x,y)$ is false?
- Is there a predicate $A(x,y)$ such that the statement $\exists y\ \forall x:\ A(x,y)$ is true, while the statement $\forall x\ \exists y:\ A(x,y)$ is false?
Problem 4. Prove Theorem 1.3.2.
Problem 5. A clothing store advertises: For every customer we have a rack of clothes that fit.
- Write the statement above using quantifier(s) and predicate(s).
- Negate the sentence using quantifier(s) and predicate(s).
- Write the negation in the form of an English sentence. (Don't just write It is not true that...)