Logic, Truth Table question

In summary: That's a rule that says that if you have a formula like ##\neg\neg\theta##, you can replace it with ##\theta##. So if you have already worked out that the symbolic form of p|q is ##\neg\neg(p\wedge q)##, then the simplest symbolic form of ~(p|q) should be ##p\wedge q##.In summary, the conversation was about constructing a truth table for a symbolic expression ~(p|q) using the notation ~ for negate, /\ for and, and \/ for or. The original statement (p|q) expresses that "p and q are not both true", which is equivalent to ~(p/\~q). However,
  • #1
SmokeyMTNJim
18
0
<< Mentor Note -- Moved from the technical math forums, so no HH Template is shown >>

I am currently working through a Finite math book Intro to finite math: second Edition Kemeny, Snell, and Thompson. One of the exercises wants me to construct a truth table for the following:
~(p|q) earlier I am told that let p|q express that "p and q are not both true". Earlier I worked out that the symbolic form of this statement (p|q) to be ~(p/\~q).

my work on constructing a truth table for ~(p|q)
p|q ~ ~ (p /\ ~ q)
t t F T t f f t
t f T F t t t f
f t F T f f f t
f f F T f f t f

From here I thought I was to answer the ~ closest to (p, by countering what was under /\, giving me T F T T and then further negating that, ending with F T F F. This is wrong according to the book. as this truth table should end with T F F F.

2 questions: Is my symbolic form of ~(p|q) wrong and therefore my answer wrong, and/or, did I work something out wrong giving me the wrong answer. I think I probably made the symbolic version wrong but am not sure of how to go about this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
This doesn't look right to me at all.
I have always understood p|q to represent "p or q". That isn't "p and q are not both true", which would be (~p)|(~q), or equivalently ~(p^q). It certainly cannot be ~(p/\~q) since that loses the symmetry between p and q.
 
  • #3
I can assure you that this book states :
7. let p|q express that "p and q are not both true." write a symbolic expression for p|q using ~ and /\. This textbook uses the notation \/ for or, /\ for and, ~ for negate.
I hope this helps and thank you for your response
 
  • #4
SmokeyMTNJim said:
I can assure you that this book states :
7. let p|q express that "p and q are not both true." write a symbolic expression for p|q using ~ and /\. This textbook uses the notation \/ for or, /\ for and, ~ for negate.
I hope this helps and thank you for your response
Ok, that's fine, but that does not make it ~(p^~q). As I wrote, that is not symmetric in p and q. Let's get that right first.
 
  • #5
Okay, I do understand that what I did was incorrect. I am just trying to figure out how to solve this. I am having trouble tying to break it down into simple statements (p|q) = p and q are not both true. Simple statements: p is true, q is true. Here i don't know what to do about the both clause, because i don't think these two statements represent the given symbolic statement. I tried using exclusive disjunction ~ (p|q) = ~(p \/ q) but this truth table did not math what the answer in the book says. the book says the truth table should be TFFF.

Any insight on what I am doing wrong, or missing?
 
  • #6
SmokeyMTNJim said:
(p|q) = p and q are not both true.
Right. If they are not both true then at least one of them is. ...?
Can you put that into English in the form "either ... or ..."?
 
  • #7
SmokeyMTNJim said:
this book states :
7. let p|q express that "p and q are not both true."
I cannot understand the truth table in the OP because the column headings are all over the place.
However "p and q are not both true" means the same as "not (p and q are both true)", which is symbolised as ##\neg(p\wedge q)##. So you can make a truth table by just reversing every entry in the standard truth table for the conjunction ##p\wedge q##.

As I understand it, you have been asked to symbolise the negation of p|q, in other words ##\neg(\neg(p\wedge q))##. If you are using Classical Logic, rather than some fancy version like Intuitionist or Minimal Logic, you can use 'double negation elimination' to simlify that.
 

1. What is a logic truth table?

A logic truth table is a visual representation of the possible outcomes of a logical statement or argument. It lists all the possible combinations of truth values for the variables involved in the statement and shows the resulting truth value for the entire statement.

2. How do you read a truth table?

To read a truth table, you first need to understand the basic logic symbols and their meanings. Then, you can look at each row of the truth table and see which variables are assigned a true or false value. Finally, you can use the logical operators (AND, OR, NOT) to determine the overall truth value of the statement based on the values of the variables.

3. What is the purpose of using a truth table?

The purpose of using a truth table is to determine the validity of a logical statement or argument. It allows us to see all the possible outcomes and determine if the statement is always true, sometimes true, or never true.

4. How is a truth table helpful in problem-solving?

A truth table is helpful in problem-solving because it allows us to break down complex logical statements into simpler components and analyze their truth values. It helps us to identify any errors or contradictions in our reasoning and find the correct solution.

5. Can a truth table be used for any type of logic problem?

Yes, a truth table can be used for any type of logic problem, as long as it involves logical statements and variables with assigned truth values. It is a useful tool for solving problems in propositional logic, predicate logic, and other forms of deductive reasoning.

Similar threads

  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
839
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
4
Views
876
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
941
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top