Difficulty understanding a logical equivalence

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zelmac
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difficulty Equivalence
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
3 replies · 2K views
zelmac
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
[itex]\exists{x}(P(x)\Rightarrow{Q(x)})\equiv{\forall{x}P(x)\Rightarrow{\exists{x}Q(x)}}[/itex]

I am able to derive this equivalence by using the standard equivalences of symbolic logic, but when I try to verify this semantically, with an example, I just can't see why these two expressions are equivalent.

Example:
Lets say that x represents days, P(x) represents it's cold on day x, and Q(x) represents it is snowing on day x. If it is true that it is cold every day, and it is true that there is a snowy day, why must it be true that there is a day when, if it is cold, than snow MUST fall?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If it is cold every day, and there is at least one snowy day, this snowy day has to be cold. Therefore, there is a day (∃) where it is cold and snow falls.
 
You concluded:
[itex]\exists{x}(P(x)\wedge{Q(x)})[/itex]
and I'm wondering how do you get to:
[itex]\exists{x}(P(x)\Rightarrow{Q(x)})[/itex]