Equivalence of Implications: P, Q, and R

  • Thread starter Thread starter Easy_as_Pi
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on demonstrating the logical equivalence of statements involving propositions P, Q, and R using truth tables. Specifically, it addresses two pairs of statements: (P^Q) <=> P and P=>Q, as well as P=>(Q v R) and (~Q)=>(~P v R). The participants emphasize the importance of correctly filling out the truth tables to establish these equivalences, noting the complexity introduced by the multiple variables. A systematic approach involving eight possible combinations of truth values for P, Q, and R is recommended for clarity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of logical operators: conjunction (^) and disjunction (v)
  • Familiarity with implications and their truth conditions
  • Knowledge of constructing truth tables
  • Basic concepts of propositional logic
NEXT STEPS
  • Study how to construct truth tables for multiple variables in propositional logic
  • Learn about logical equivalences and their proofs
  • Explore the implications of De Morgan's laws in logical statements
  • Practice problems involving truth tables and logical implications
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students of logic, mathematics, and computer science, particularly those studying propositional logic and truth tables. It is also useful for educators seeking to clarify these concepts for their students.

Easy_as_Pi
Messages
31
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


For statements P, Q, and R, use a truth table to show that each of the following pairs of statements are logically equivalent.
a) (P^Q) <=> P and P=>Q
b) P=>(Q v R) and (~Q)=>(~P v R)

screen_capture.jpg


The Attempt at a Solution


See attached truth tables.
Basically, I have no idea how to correlate P and QvR in the table. If P is false or QvR is true, then the implication is true; I know that. I know P can only have 2 values, true or false, but QvR is only false under one condition. So, is P true or false in that slot? I can't figure out how to make the table, though.
With the second table in b, I know how Q and not Q (~Q) relate, but can't see how to relate ~Q with (~PvR). If ~Q is false or (~PvR) is true, the implication is true. Again, I know how the implication works. It's this truth table that is making this problem vastly more difficult than it needs to be. Any help on filling them out is greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you have to fill them out in 4 rows?? That's weird.

The way I would handle it is to regard 8 possibilities:

P Q R
F F F
F F T
F T F
F T T
T F F
T F T
T T F
T T T

and fill in the rest.
 
Micro, you have came to rescue on a few of these problems for me. I really appreciate it. I don't think I have to fill it out in the way I did, but I was following the example in my book. None of them had three variables. Your method seems like the best. Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K