2.1.

Propositions and Logical Operation

Statement (Proposition)
A statement or proposition is a declarative sentence that is either true or false but not both Example 1: Yes. (a) The earth is round. Yes. (b) 2+3=5 No. This is a question. (c) Do you speak English? No. May true or false (d) 3-x=5 No. This is a command. (e) Take two aspirins. (f) The temperature on the surface of the planet Venus is 800 F
Yes.

(g) The sun will come out tomorrow

yes

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Paradox
Paradox: A paradox is a seemingly true statement or group of statements that lead to a contradiction or a situation which seems to defy logic or intuition . Paradox is not a statement. Example I am lying, this sentence is wrong etc

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Propositional variables
In logic, the letters p, q, r denote propositional variables, which are replaced by statements p: 1+2 = 5 q: It is raining.

Compound statements
Propositional variables can be combined by logical connectives to obtain compound statements. E.g. p and q : 1+2 =5 and it is raining.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Negation (a unary operation)

If p is a statement, the negation of p is the statement not p, denoted by ~ p, meaning it is not the case that p. if p is true, then ~p is false, and if p is false, then ~p is true. Truth Table : List the truth value of a compound statement in terms of its component parts.
p T F ~p F T

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Example:
Give the negation of the following statements (a) p: 2+3 >1 (b) q: It is snowing.
Solution: (a) ~p: 2+3 is not greater than 1, namely, 2+3 <=1 (b) ~q: It is not the case that it is snowing. More simply, ~q: It is not snowing.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Conjunction
If p and q are statements, the conjunction of p and q is the compound statement p and q denoted by p q . Truth Table :
p T T q T F p q T F

F
F

T
F

F
F

Note: p q is T if and only if p is T and q is T.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Example
Form the conjunction of p and q p: 1>3 q: It is raining.
Solution: p q : 1 > 3 and It is raining. Note: In logic, unlike in everyday English, we may join two totally unrelated statements by logical connectives.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Disjunction
If p and q are statements, the disjunction of p and q is the compound statement p or q, denoted by p V q
Truth Table :
p T T F F q T F T F pVq T T T F

Note: p V q is F is and only if q is F and q is F.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

The connective or
(a) I left for Spain on Monday or I left for Spain on Friday.
(b) I passed math or I failed French

Note: Case (a): Both could not have occurred. or is an exclusive sense in this case. Case (b): Both could have occurred. or is an inclusive sense in this case. In mathematics and computer science. We agree to use the connective or in inclusive manner.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Example:
Form the disjunction of p and q
p: 2 is a positive integer q : sqrt(2) is a rational number

Solution: p V q: 2 is a positive integer or sqrt(2) is a rational number. Since p is true, p V q is true, even through q is false.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Algorithm for making Truth Table:

Step 1: The first n columns of the table are labeled by the component propositional variables. Further columns are included for all intermediate combinations of the variables, culminating in a column for the full statement.
Step 2: Under each of the first n headings, we list the 2n possible n-tuples of truth values for the n component statements. Step 3: For each of the remaining columns, we compute, in sequence, the remaining truth values.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Example 5:
Make a truth table for the statement (p q) V (~ p)
Truth Table:
p T q T p q T ~p F V T

T
F F

F
T F

F
F F (1)

F
T T (2)

F
T T (3)

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Propositional function (predicate)

An element of a set {x | P(x)} is an object t for which the statement P(t) is true. P(x) is called a propositional function (or predicate) , because each choice of x produces a proposition P(x) that is either true or false (well-defined)
E.g. Let A={ x | x is an integer less than 8}. Here P(x) is the sentence x is an integer less than 8 P(1) denotes the statement 1 is an integer less than 8 (true) P(8) denotes the statement 8 is an integer less than 8 (false)

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Universal Quantifiers ()
The Universal Quantifiers of a predicate P(x) is the statement for all values of x, P(x) is true , denoted by x P(x) Example 8 (a) P(x) : -(-x) = x is a predicate that makes sense for all real number x. then x P(x) is true statement. Since x R, -(-x) = x (b) Q(x): x+1<4. then x Q(x) is a false statement, since Q(5) is false

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

Existential Quantifiers ()
The Existential Quantifiers of a predicate P(x) is the statement there exists a value of x for which P(x) is true, denoted by x P(x) Example 9 (a) Let Q(x): x+1<4. then the existential quantification of Q(x), x Q(x), is a true statement, since Q(1) is a true statement
(b) The statement y y+2=y is false since there is no value of y for which the propositional function y+2=y produces a true statement.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

The order of the Quantifiers &

The order does not affect the output for the same quantifiers, while it may produce different results for different quantifiers.
E.g. P(x, y) : x + y =1 x y P(x) is true, y x is false. P(x, y): x *y = 0 x y P(x) is true, y x is true too.

2.1. Propositions and Logical Operation

The negation of Quantifiers &

(a) let p: x P(x),
then ~p: there must be at least one value of x for which P(x) is false, namely, ~ x P(x) = x ~P(x) (b) let p: x P(x), then ~p: for all x, P(x) is false, namely, ~ x P(x)= x ~P(x)

2.2. Conditional Statements

Conditional statement
If p and q are statements, the compound statement if p then q, denoted p=>q, is called a conditional statement or implication. p : antecedent or hypothesis q : consequent or conclusion if then : => Truth Table :
p T T q T F p => q T F

F
F

T
F

T
T

Note: when p is F, then p=>q is T.

2.2. Conditional Statements

Example
Form the implication p=>q for each the following (a) p: I am hungry. q: I will eat. (b) p: 2+2=5 q: I am the king of England.

Solution
(a) If I am hungry, then I will eat (b) If 2+2=5, then I am the king of England Note: There is no cause-and effect relationship between p and q in case (b). And (b) is true, since 2+2=5 is false.

2.2. Conditional Statements

Converse and Contrapositive

If p=>q is an implication, then its converse is the implication q => p and its contrapositive is the implication ~ q => ~p
E.g. Give the converse and the contrapositive of the implication If it is raining, then I get wet Converse: If I get wet, then It is raining. Contrapositive: If I do not get wet, then It is not raining.

2.2. Conditional Statements

Equivalence (biconditional)
If p and q are statements, the compound statement p if and only if q, denoted by p q, is called an equivalence or biconditional.
Truth Table :
p T T F F q T F T F pq T F F T

Note: p <=> q is T when p and q are both T or both F.

2.2. Conditional Statements

Example 3:
Is the following equivalence a true statement? 3>2 if and only if 0< 3 2 Solution: Let p: 3>2 and q : 0< 3 2, since p and q are both true, we then conclude that p q is true statement.

2.2. Conditional Statements

Example 4.
Compute the truth table of the statement (p=>q) (~q => ~p) Truth Table :
p T T F F q T F T F p=>q T F T T ~q F T F T ~p F F T T ~q=>~p T F T T (p=>q) (~q => ~p) T T T T

2.2. Conditional Statements

Tautology
A statement that is true for all possible values of its propositional variables called Tautology. (e.g. Example 4)

Contradiction (Absurdity)
A statement that is false for all possible values of its propositional variables called Contradiction or Absurdity. (e.g. p ~p)

Contingency
A statement that can be either true or false, depending on the truth values of its propositional variables, is called a contingency. (e.g. p => q)

2.2. Conditional Statements

Logically Equivalent
If two statements p and q are always either both true or both false, for any values of the propositional variables, namely p q is a tautology Then we call p and q are logically equivalent. Denoted by pq

2.2. Conditional Statements

Example 6
Show that p V q and q V p are logically equivalent The truth table of (p V q ) (q V p ) are shown as follows Truth Table :
p T T F F q T F T F pVq T T T F qVp T T T F p V q q V p T T T T

2.2. Conditional Statements

Two Structures with similar properties (Theorem 1) Structure 1 (logic operations): (propositions, , V, ~)

Structure 2 (sets operations) (sets, U, , - )

2.2. Conditional Statements

Theorem 1
Commutative properties p q q p, p q q p Associative Properties p (q r) (p q) r , p (q r) (p q) r
Distributive Properties p (q r) (p q) (p r) p (q r) (p q) (p r)

2.2. Conditional Statements

Idempotent Properties pp p ,

p p p

Properties of Negation ~(~p) p ~(p q) (~p) (~q) ~(p q) (~p) (~q) De Morgans laws

2.2. Conditional Statements

Theorem 2

(p q) ((~p) q) (p q) (~q ~p) (p q) ((p q) (q p)) ~(p q) (p ~q) ~(p q) ((p ~q) (q ~p))

2.2. Conditional Statements

Theorem 3
~(xP(x)) x~P(x) ~(xP(x)) x(~P(x)) x(P(x) Q(x)) xP(x) xQ(x) x(P(x) Q(x)) xP(x) xQ(x) x(P(x) Q(x)) xP(x) xQ(x) xP(x) xQ(x) x(P(x) Q(x)) is a tautology x(P(x) Q(x)) xP(x) xQ(x) is a tautology

2.2. Conditional Statements

Theorem 4 : Each of the following is a tautology (p q) p , (p q) q p (p q) , q (p q) ~p (p q) , ~(p q) p (p (p q)) q , (~p (p q)) q (~q (p q)) ~p ((p q) (q r)) (p r)

2.2. Conditional Statements

Properties of Quantifiers and (a) x (P(x) V Q(x)) x P(x) V x (Q(x)) (b) x (P(x) Q(x)) x P(x) x Q(x)

2.3. Method of Proof

Logically Follow
If an implication p q is a tautology, where p and q may be compound statements involving any number of proposition variables, we say that q logically follows from p.
Suppose that an implication of the form (p1 p2 pn) q is a tautology. We say that q logically follows from p1, p2, , pn, denoted by

2.3. Method of Proof

(p1 p2 pn) q
The pis are called the hypotheses or premises, and q is called the conclusion. Note: we are not trying to show that q is true, but only that q will be true if all the pi are true. denotes therefore

2.3. Method of Proof

Rules of inference
Arguments based on tautologies represent universally correct methods of reasoning. Their validity depends only on the form of the statements involved and not on the truth values of the variables they contain.

Example 1
((p q) (q r)) (p r) is tautology, then the argument

is universally valid, and so is a rule of inference.

2.3. Method of Proof

Example 2: Is the following argument valid?

If you invest in the stock market, then you will get rich. If you get rich, then you will be happy. If you invest in the stock market, then you will be happy. let p: you invest in the stock market, q: you will get rich r: you will be happy The above argument is of the form given in Example 1, hence the argument is valid!

2.3. Method of Proof

Example 3 The tautology

(p q) ((p q) (q p)) means that the following two arguments are valid pq qp p q

p q (p q) (q p)

2.3. Method of Proof

Equivalence (p q)
They are usually stated p if and only if q. We need to prove both p=>q and q=>p by the tautology mentioned in example 3. Algorithm : Step one: Assuming p is true, show q must be true. Step two: Assuming q is true, show p must be true.

2.3. Method of Proof

Modus Ponens
p is true, and p=>q is true, so q is true

p p=>q q

2.3. Method of Proof

Example 4: Is the following argument valid?

Smoking is healthy. If smoking is healthy, then cigarettes are prescribed by physicians. Cigarettes are prescribed by physicians p: Smoking is healthy. q: cigarettes are prescribed by physicians The argument is valid since it is of form modus ponens.

2.3. Method of Proof

Example 5 Is the following argument valid?

If taxes are lowered, then income rises Income rises taxes are lowered Solution: Let p: taxes are lowed q: income rise p=>q (or show the truth table of ((p=>q) q) => p , and determine q whether or not it is a tautology) p Then argument is not valid , since p=>q and q can be both true with p being false.

2.3. Method of Proof

Indirect Method of Proof (Proof by contradiction)

The tautology (p=>q ) (~q) => (~p )
(An implication is equivalent to its contrapositive) Note: To proof p=>q indirectly, we assume q is false (~q) and show that p is then false (~p)

2.3. Method of Proof

Example 6
Let n be an integer. Prove that if n2 is odd, then n is odd.
Solution: Let p: n2 is odd , q: n is odd. To prove that (p=>q) We try to prove its contrapositive ~q=>~p Assuming that n is even (~q), let n=2k, k is an integer, then we have n2 = (2k) 2 =4k2 is even (~p). Hence, the given statement has been proved.

2.3. Method of Proof

The tautology ((p q) (~q)) ~p

If a statement p implies a false statement q, then p must be false. Proof by contradiction To prove (p1 p2 pn) q , We add (~q) into hypothesis p1 p2 pn, if the enlarged hypothesis p1 p2 pn (~q) implies a contradiction, then we can conclude that q follows from p1 ,p2 , and pn .

2.3. Method of Proof

Example 7
Prove there is no rational number a/b whose square is 2, namely, sqrt(2) is irrational.

Solution:
Let p: a, b are integers and no common factors, and b is not 0 q: (a/b)2 is not 2 In order to prove p => q , We try to find the contradiction from p ~q

2.3. Method of Proof

Example 9:
Prove or disprove the statement that if x and y are real numbers, (x2=y2) (x=y) Solution: Since (1)2=(-1)2, but -1 1, the result is false. Our example is called counterexample, and any other counterexample would do just as well. Note: If a statement claims that a property holds for all objects of a certain type, then to prove it, we must use steps that are valid for all objects of that type and that do not make references to any particular object. To disprove such a statement, we need only show one counterexample.

2.4 Mathematical Induction

To Prove

n>n0 P(n) where n0 is some fixed integer Two Steps: 1) Basis Step Prove that P(n0) is true 2) Induction Step Prove that P(k) => P(k+1) is a tautology
(if P(k) is true, then P(k+1) must be true)

2.4 Mathematical Induction

Example 1: Prove that for all n>0 1+2+3+n = n(n+1)/2

Solution: let P(n)=n(n+1)/2 Basis step: P(1) = 1 = 1*2/2=1 is true. Induction Step: assuming P(k) is true, then P(k+1) = 1+2 + 3 + k +(k+1) = P(k) +(k+1) = k (k+1)/2 +(k+1) P(k) is true = (k+1)(k+2)/2 = P(k+1)

2.4 Mathematical Induction

Example 3: Prove any finite, nonempty set is countable (the elements can be arranged in a list)
Solution: Let P(n) be the predicate that if A is any set with |A|=n>0, then A is countable Basis Step: P(1) is true ( A ={x} ) Induction Step: assuming P(k) is true Let B denotes any finite, nonempty set with k+1 elements. We first pick any element x in B, then B-{x} is a set with k elements, and it is countable (P(k) is true), and listed by x1,x2,xk . Then we can also list the elements of B as x1,x2,xk , x (P(k+1) is true)

2.4 Mathematical Induction

Strong Induction
Weak Induction Strong Induction

Basis Step

P(no) is true P(no) is true (or the first several (or the first several statements are statements are true) true) P(k) P(k+1) is a tautology P(n0) P(n1) P(k) P(k+1) is a tautology

Induction Step

2.4 Mathematical Induction

Example 7: Prove that every positive integer n>1 can be written uniquely as p1a1p2a2psas, where pi are primes and p1<p2<..Ps
Basis Step : P(2) is true, since 2 is prime and 2 = 21 (unique ) Induction Step: Assuming P(2), P(3), P(k) are true if k+1 is prime, then k+1= (k+1)1 if k+1 is not prime, then we let k+1=Lm, where L, m are positive integers less than k+1. Using P(L) and P(m) are true, we have k+1=Lm= q1b1q2b2qsbs (unique form)

Prove that 3 n > n 2 for n = 1, n = 2 and use the mathematical induction to prove that 3 n > n 2 for n a positive integer greater than 2. Statement P (n) is defined by 3 n > n 2 STEP 1: We first show that p (1) is true. Let n = 1 and calculate 3 1 and 1 2 and compare them 3 1 = 3, 1 2 = 1. 3 is greater than 1 and hence p (1) is true. Let us also show that P(2) is true. 3 2 = 9 , 2 2 = 4. Hence P(2) is also true. STEP 2: We now assume that p (k) is true i,e,3 k > k 2 Multiply both sides of the above inequality by 3 3 * 3k > 3 * k2 The left side is equal to 3 k + 1. For k >, 2, we can write k 2 > 2 k and k 2 > 1 We now combine the above inequalities by adding the left hand sides and the right hand sides of the two inequalities 2 k2 > 2 k + 1 We now add k 2 to both sides of the above inequality to obtain the inequality 3 k2 > k2 + 2 k + 1 Factor the right side we can write 3 * k 2 > (k + 1) 2 If 3 * 3 k > 3 * k 2 and 3 * k 2 > (k + 1) 2 then 3 * 3 k > (k + 1) 2 Rewrite the left side as 3 k + 1 3 k + 1 > (k + 1) 2 Which proves tha P(k + 1) is true

Prove that n ! > 2 n for n a positive integer greater than or equal to 4. (Note: n! is n factorial and is given by 1 * 2 * ...* (n-1)*n.) Statement P (n) is defined by n! > 2 n STEP 1: We first show that p (4) is true. Let n = 4 and calculate 4 ! and 2 n and compare them 4! = 24 , 2 4 = 16 , 24 is greater than 16 and hence p (4) is true. STEP 2: We now assume that p (k) is true k! > 2 k Multiply both sides of the above inequality by k + 1 k! (k + 1)> 2 k (k + 1) The left side is equal to (k + 1)!. For k >, 4, we can write k + 1 > 2 Multiply both sides of the above inequality by 2 k to obtain 2 k (k + 1) > 2 * 2 k The above inequality may be written 2 k (k + 1) > 2 k + 1 We have proved that (k + 1)! > 2 k (k + 1) and 2 k (k + 1) > 2 k + 1 we can now write (k + 1)! > 2 k + 1 We have assumed that statement P(k) is true and proved that statment P(k+1) is also true.

1. What is a Loop Invariant?

A loop invariant is an inductive statement which says something which is always true about a program loop. Loop invariants are useful for: code specification debugging A loop invariant is typically written as an inductive statement S(n), where n is some changing element of the loop. For example: the loop counter/index a loop variable which changes on each iteration

Example 1
Problem: does this function work?

int square(int val) { int result = 0; int counter = 0; while (counter < val) { result += val; counter++; } return result; }

Pre- and Post-conditions

We assume that val is a positive integer
the precondition for this function
square()

always returns val2

the postcondition we will use the loop invariant to show that this is true

The Loop Invariant

To make the proof clearer, let countern and resultn be the values of counter and result after passing round the loop n times.
Loop invariant S(n):
resultn = val * countern is this true in the loop for all n >= 0?

Basis
S(0) is when the loop has not yet been executed.
result0 = counter0 = 0

So:
result0 = val * counter0 which means that S(0) is true.

Induction
We assume that S(k) is true for some k >= 0, which means that:
resultk = val * counterk (1)

After one more pass through the loop:

resultk+1 = resultk + val counterk+1 = counterk + 1 (2)

(3)

continued

 Substitute the RHS of (1) for the 1st operand of the rhs of (2):
resultk+1 = (val * counterk) + val = val * (counterk + 1) = val * counterk+1 (by using

(3))

this is S(k+1), which is therefore true.

continued

 For the loop, we now know:

S(0) is true S(k) --> S(k+1) is true

That means S(n) is true for all n >= 0

for all n >= 0, the loop invariant is true: resultn = val * countern

Termination
The loop does actually terminate, since counter is increasing, and will reach val. At loop termination (and function return):
countern = val

So in S(n):
resultn = val * val = val2
The function works!!

So the postcondition is true.

Example 2
Problem: does this function work?

int exp(int b, int m) // return bm { int res = 1; while (m > 0) { res = res * b; m = m - 1; } return res; }

Pre- and Post-conditions

We assume b and m are non-negative integers
the preconditions for this function
exp()

always returns bm

the postcondition we will use the loop invariant to show that this is true

The Loop Invariant

To clarify the proof, let resn and mn be the values of res and m after passing round the loop n times.
Loop invariant S(n):
Inventing this is the hardest part.

resn * bmn = bm is this true in the loop for all n >= 0?

Basis
S(0) is when the loop has not yet been executed.
res0 = 1; m0 = m

So:
1 * bm = bm which means that S(0) is true.

Induction
We assume that S(k) is true for some k >= 0, which means that:
resk * bmk = bm (1)

After one more pass through the loop:

resk+1 = resk * b mk+1 = mk - 1 (2)

(3)

continued

 Rearrange the equations:

resk = resk+1 / b mk = mk+1 + 1 (2)

(3)

Substitute the right hand sides of (2) and (3) into (1):
( resk+1 / b ) * b(mk+1 + 1 ) = bm which is resk+1 * b(mk+1 + 1 - 1 ) = bm which is resk+1 * bmk+1 = bm

continued

 S(k+1) is:
resk+1 * bmk+1 = bm

(4)

So we have shown S(k+1) is true by using S(k).

continued

 For the loop, we now know:

S(0) is true S(k) --> S(k+1) is true

That means S(n) is true for all n >= 0

for all n >= 0, the loop invariant is true: resn * bmn = bm

Termination
The loop does actually terminate, since m is decreasing, and will reach 0. At loop termination (and function return):
mn = 0

So in S(n):
resn * b0 = bm so resn = bm
The function works!!

So the postcondition is true.

Example 3
Problem: does this function work?

int factorial(int num) { int i = 2; int fact = 1; while (i <= num) { fact = fact * i; i++; } return fact; }

Pre- and Post-conditions

We assume num is a positive integer
the precondition for this function
factorial()

always returns num!

the postcondition we will use the loop invariant to show that this is true

The Loop Invariant

To clarify the proof, let factn and in be the values of fact and i after passing round the loop n times.
Loop invariant S(n):
factn = (in - 1)! is this true in the loop for all n >= 0?

Basis
S(0) is when the loop has not yet been executed.
i0 = 2; fact0 = 1

So:

fact0 = (i0 - 1)! 1 = (2 - 1)! 1=1

which means that S(0) is true.

Induction
We assume that S(k) is true for some k >= 0, which means that:
factk = (ik-1)! (1)

After one more pass through the loop:

factk+1 = factk * ik ik+1 = ik + 1 (2) (3)

continued

 Substitute the rhs of (1) for the 1st operand of the rhs of (2):
factk+1 = (ik - 1)! * ik = (ik)! = (ik+1 - 1)!

(by using (3))

this is S(k+1), which is therefore true.

continued

 For the loop, we now know:

S(0) is true S(k) --> S(k+1) is true

That means S(n) is true for all n >= 0

for all n >= 0, the loop invariant is true: factn = (in - 1)!

Termination
The loop does actually terminate, since i is increasing, and will reach num+1. At loop termination (and function return):
in = num+1

So in S(n):
factn = (in - 1)! = (num + 1 - 1)! = num!
The function works!!

So the postcondition is true.

Convert the following statements into a formal proposition: a) If the unicorn is mythical, then it is immortal, but if it is not mythical, then it is a mortal mammal. If the unicorn is either immortal or a mammal, then it is horned. The unicorn is magical if it is horned. Consider the following three propositions: b) The unicorn is mythical. c) The unicorn is magical. d) The unicorn is horned. Construct a truth table. From it, determine whether each of b, c or d follows necessarily from a. Solution. M: unicorn is mythical O: unicorn is mortal A: unicorn is mammal H: unicorn is horned G: unicorn is magical M ~O If the unicorn is mythical, then it is immortal, ~M O ^ A but if it is not mythical, then it is a mortal mammal. ~O v A H If the unicorn is either immortal or a mammal, then it is horned. H G The unicorn is magical if it is horned The truth table below is sufficient to answer the queries (one only need to find the shaded rows, since they are the only ones which are all true for the above)

M T T T

O T T T

A T T T

H T T F

G T F T

M~O F F F

~M O^A T T T

~O v A H T T F

HG T F T

T T T
T T T T T T T T T

T T T
T T F F F F F F F

T F F
F F T T T T F F F

F T T
F F T T F F T T F

F T F
T F T F T F T F T

F F F
F F T T T T T T T

T T T
T T T T T T T T T

F T T
T T T T F F T T F

T T F
T T T F T T T F T

M~O

~M O^A

~O v A H

HG

T F F F F
F F F F F F F F F F F F

F T T T T
T T T T F F F F F F F F

F T T T T
F F F F T T T T F F F F

F T T F F
T T F F T T F F T T F F

F T F T F
T F T F T F T F T F T F

T T T T T
T T T T T T T T T T T T

T T T T T
F F F F F F F F F F F F

F T T F F
T T T T T T F F T T F F

T T F T T
T F T T T F T T T F T T

The results: e) The unicorn is mythical. a. M: not T in all shaded rows, hence does not follow from the sentences f) The unicorn is magical. a. G: T in all shaded rows, hence follows necessarily g) The unicorn is horned. a. H: T in all shaded rows, hence follows necessarily

Problem 1 : Find the truth table of the compound proposition (p q)(p r).

p T T T T F F F F

q T T F F T T F F

r T F T F T F T F

(p q)(p r). F T F T F F T T

Problem 2: Give the converse, the contrapositive, and the inverse of the statement If it rains today, then I will drive to work. The converse is If I drive to work today, then it will rain. (q => p) The contrapositive is If I do not drive to work today, then it will not rain. (~ q => ~p ) The inverse is If it does not rain today, then I will not drive to work. (~ p => ~q )

Show that p(q r) and q (p r) are logically equivalent using the laws of logical equivalences. Be sure to cite each law whenever used.

p(q r) p ( q r) ( p) (( q r) p ( q r) (p q) r ( q p) r q (p r) q (p r)

[p q p q]

[Double Negation Law] [Associative Law] [Commutative Law] [Associative Law] [p q p q]

(a) F; (b) T; (c) F; (d) T; (e) F; (f) T

(a) F; (b) T

Using induction prove that 103n+13n+1 is divisible by 7 for all positive integer value of n Let P(n)= 103n+13n+1 P(0)=1+13=14 which is divisible by 7 P(1)=1000+169=1169 which is divisible by 7 Let us assume P(K)= 103k+13k+1 is divisible by 7 Therefore P(K)= 103k+13k+1 =7p where p is a positive integer P(k+1)= 103(k+1)+13(k+1)+1 = 103k+3+13k+2 = 103103k+13k+2 = 103(7p - 13k+1) +13k+2 = 7000p 1000.13k+1+13 .13k+1 = 7000p 987.13k+1 = 7(1000p 141.13k+1) which is divisible by 7 as the quantity inside the parentheses is an integer