How Can I Correctly Prove the Demorgan Laws?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tomboi03
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law
tomboi03
Messages
74
Reaction score
0
1st Demorgan Law
A-(B\cupC) = (A-B)\cap(A-C)

I tried this..
={x: x\inA, x\notin(B\cupC)}
={x: x\inA, x\notinB OR x\notinC}
={x: x\inA, x\notinB AND x\inA, x\notinC}
=(A-B)\cap(A-C)

2nd Demorgan Law
A-(B\capC) = (A-B)\cup(A-C)

={x: x\inA, x\notin(B\capC)}
={x: x\inA, x\notinB AND x\notinC}
={x: x\inA, x\notinB OR x\inA, x\notinC}
=(A-B)\cup(A-C)

Is this wrong? What am I doing wrong?
Please help me out!

Thank You!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tomboi03 said:
1st Demorgan Law
A-(B\cupC) = (A-B)\cap(A-C)

I tried this..
={x: x\inA, x\notin(B\cupC)}
={x: x\inA, x\notinB OR x\notinC}
There's your problem. x\notin(B\cupC) if and only if x\notinB AND x\notinC. It helps to imagine the sets as venn diagrams. Alternatively, look at it as \neg (x \in (B\cupC)) which becomes \neg(x \inB OR x\inC) and then the not distributes by de morgan's law for logic, producing x\notinB AND x\notinC. I assume you're allowed to use his logic rules to prove that they hold for sets. You make a similar mistake in the second one.
 
Yes i agree with mXSCNT he explained very well where you made a mistake .

Alternatively you can prove the above by using the concept of subsets:

X=Y iff( X is a subset of Y and Y is a subset of X) iff ( xεX <===>xεY)
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Back
Top