Is this equation at all sensical?

[DaveC426913]

TL;DR

This looks like nonsense, or at least nothing meaningful.

(Yes, I'm guilty of passing along something incomplete and of utterly unknown provenance that someone saw somewhere and didn't understand. I feel dirty.)


∀t(T(x,t)⟹(¬H(x,t)∨H(x,t+Δt)))

Certainly, without specifying any of the variables, it's got to be useless. At least we can assume t and Δt refer to time/delta time - which is my rationale for posting here in the physics subforum)

Chat GPT made a broad guess but couldn't make heads or tails of it either. Don't judge me.

 

[Ibix]

I would normally interpret those symbols as logical operators, so you might be better asking in the relevant maths forum. Difficult to tell without context, though.

 

[Baluncore]

∀t(T(x,t)⟹(¬H(x,t)∨H(x,t+Δt)))
For all t, T(x,t) implies ( NOT( H(x,t) ) OR H(x,t+Δt) )
T(x,t) is FALSE if H(x,t) was TRUE, and H(x,t+Δt) is FALSE.
T(x,t) is FALSE when H(x,t) transitions to FALSE in next sample.
A negative edge in H causes T to go low for one cycle.

Maybe it is from a formal HDL used to describe logic functions.

 

[Baluncore]

It looks a bit like input code for a Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover.
Example here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nqthm#Theorem_formulation
"(IMPLIES (AND (NOT (ZEROP X)) (p (SUB1 X) Z))"

ACL2 or "A Computational Logic for Applicative Common Lisp", an applicative (side-effect free) variant of Common LISP. ACL2 is both a programming language which can model computer systems, and a tool to help proving properties of those models.