How to Negate Complex Logical Assertions in Mathematics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pythagorean12
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the negation of complex logical assertions in mathematics, specifically involving natural numbers. The correct negations provided are: for assertion (a), "if Coke is not worse than Pepsi then everything Mandelson says can be trusted," and for assertion (b), "there exists m for all n, there exists a, there exists b such that (n < m) or [(a ≠ 1) and (b ≠ 1) and (ab = n)]." The key takeaway is that the negation of an "if-then" statement is not itself an "if-then" statement.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of logical implications and their negations
  • Familiarity with quantifiers such as "for all" (∀) and "there exists" (∃)
  • Basic knowledge of natural numbers and their properties
  • Experience with logical operators like conjunction (∧) and disjunction (∨)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of logical negation in propositional logic
  • Learn about quantifier negation in predicate logic
  • Explore examples of negating complex mathematical statements
  • Review the implications of logical operators in mathematical proofs
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, logic enthusiasts, and educators looking to deepen their understanding of logical assertions and their negations.

Pythagorean12
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Write down the negations of the following assertions (where m, n, a, b are natural numbers):

a) if Coke is not worse than Pepsi then nothing Mandelson says can be trusted.
b) [tex]\forall m \exists n\forall a\forall b (n >= m)[/tex] /\ [tex][(a=1)[/tex] \/[tex](b=1)[/tex] \/ [tex](ab \ne n)][/tex]

Answers:
a) if Coke is not worse than Pepsi then everything Mandelson says can be trusted.
b) [tex]\exists m\forall n \exists a\exists b (n < m)[/tex] \/[tex][(a \ne 1)[/tex] /\ [tex](b \ne 1)[/tex] /\ [tex](ab =n)][/tex]

Could anyone check whenever or not these answers are correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since you have not said what "a", "b", "m", or "n" mean, it is impossible to tell.

I will say this- the negation of an "if- then" implication is NOT an "if-then" implication.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K