Scribd
Upload
9 views3 pages

Homework 3

Uploaded by

bmharter
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
9 views3 pages

Homework 3

Uploaded by

bmharter
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Homework 3

Benjamin Harter
April 2024

1 Problems
1. Investigating the statement seems to indicate P is true:

(i) ¬P → P
(ii) ¬P ∨ ¬P (conditional law)
(iii) ¬P (idempotent law)
(iv) P (¬P → P )

This can also be reasoned quickly. Since a statement is true whenever its
consequent is true, P → Q must be true whenever P is true. Since the
antecedent is the negative of the consequent by definition, it cannot be
true while the consequent is true. As a result, the statement is true if and
only if P is true.
2. Breaking down the statement yields:

(i) (P → Q) → P
(ii) (P ∨ ¬Q) ∨ ¬P (conditional law)
(iii) P ∨ ¬Q ∨ ¬P (associative law)
(iv) P ∨ ¬P ∨ ¬Q (commutative law)
(v) T ∨ ¬Q (tautology)
Since the statement is a tautology, it is true by definition. But the state-
ment does not obviously necessitate that P is true. Even with the original
statement taken as true, if P → Q is not true, then P may not be true.
Here is the truth table:
P Q P → Q (P → Q) → P )
T T T T
T F F T
F T T F
F F T F
Since P → Q and P are only true when the other is true, and false when
the other is false, showing that if (P → Q) → P is true, then P is true.

1
3. Let A(x) mean “x ∈ A”, and B(x) mean “x ∈ B”, and so on. Assuming
A \ B ⊆ C ∩ D is true, then:

(i) (A(x) ∧ ¬B(x)) → (C(x) ∧ D(x))


(ii) (A(x) ∧ ¬B(x)) ∨ ¬(C(x) ∧ D(x)) (conditional law)
(iii) (A(x) ∧ ¬B(x)) ∨ (¬C(x) ∨ ¬D(x)) (De Morgan’s law)
(iv) (A(x) ∧ ¬B(x)) ∨ (A(x) ∧ (¬C(x) ∨ ¬D(x)) (absorption law)
(v) A(x) ∧ (¬B(x) ∨ (¬C(x) ∨ ¬D(x))) (distributive law)
(vi) A(x) ∧ (¬B(x) ∨ ¬C(x) ∨ ¬D(x)) (associative law)

From here we see that the statement has two conditions: A(x) and ¬B(x)∨
¬(C(x) ∨ ¬D(x)). Looking only at the second condition:

(i) ¬B(x) ∨ ¬C(x) ∨ ¬D(x)


(ii) ¬D(x) ∨ ¬B(x) ∨ ¬C(x) (commutative law)
(iii) ¬D(x) ∨ ¬(B(x) ∧ C(x)) (De Morgan’s law)
(iv) ¬D(x) → B(x) ∧ C(x) (conditional law)
(v) ¬D(x) → B(x) (by implication)

4. Using the same definitions as (3), and assuming x ∈ (A ∪ B) \ C:

(i) (A(x) ∨ B(x)) ∧ ¬C(x)


(ii) (A(x) ∧ ¬C(x)) ∨ (B(x) ∧ ¬C(x)) (distributive law)
(iii) x ∈ (A \ C) ∪ (B \ C) (restated)

5. Using the same definitions as (3), and assuming x ∈ (A \ B) \ C:

(i) (A(x) ∧ ¬B(x)) ∧ ¬C(x)


(ii) A(x) ∧ (¬B(x) ∧ ¬C(x)) (associative law)
(iii) A(x) ∧ ¬(B(x) ∨ C(x)) (De Morgan’s law)
(iv) x ∈ A \ (B ∪ C) (restated)

6. Let’s start with a seemingly true statement by the definition of the set:
“If R is in R, R is not in R.” Since R contains itself, it is not an element
of itself, and so doesn’t contain itself. This is a paradox: no matter what
condition R is in concerning if it can contain itself, that condition indicates
that the opposite condition should be true.
Assuming R ∈ R, we can state this as:

(i) R(R) → ¬R(R)


(ii) R(R) ∨ R(R) (conditional law)
(iii) R(R) (tautology)

2
This seems to indicate that R(R) → ¬R(R) is a tautology.
Let’s assume R ∈
/ R:

(i) ¬R(R) → R(R)


(ii) ¬R(R) ∨ ¬R(R) (conditional law)
(iii) ¬R(R) (tautology)

So both seem to be tautologies in the same logical environment, but they


are also contradictory, which shouldn’t happen between two tautologies in
this condition.

You might also like