1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Logic question

  1. Sep 4, 2013 #1
    I dont understant how the statement is false. Because I gave a reason why it is true. Can someone explain please? thank u
     

    Attached Files:

  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 4, 2013 #2

    Mark44

    Staff: Mentor

    Is F the "correct" answer?

    As long as y ≠ 0, it has a multiplicative inverse 1/y. Then if x = 1/y, xy = (1/y)(y) = 1.
     
  4. Sep 4, 2013 #3
    Yes, F is the "correct" answer
    But I believe the correct answer is T
     
  5. Sep 4, 2013 #4

    Dick

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Well, it's not true. Pay attention the quantifiers, it says there exists a fixed x such that for all y. x can't depend on y.
     
  6. Sep 5, 2013 #5
    So if an existential quantification of x is before the univeral quantification of y then that means that the value of x must be fixed?

    what if it was the universal quant of y then the existential quan of x? Then would x still have to be fixed?
     
  7. Sep 5, 2013 #6
    The way I am reading it is...
    There exists a real number x such that for all real numbers y not equal to zero , the expression xy = 1.

    Or basically how I am interpreting it is, Let y = a where a is a real number and not equal to zero, then we can find a value of x such that xa = 1. The value of x that we are looking for is x = 1/a. Then choose a number y = b such that b =/= a and not equal to zero, then we can find a value of x such that xb = 1.
    We would repeat this process for all values y = a where a is all real numbers.
    So as you can see in my understanding of the sentence, the value of x is not "fixed" as u say it is.
     
  8. Sep 5, 2013 #7

    CompuChip

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    ##\exists x \forall y (y \neq 0 \implies xy = 1)##
    is false.

    ##\forall y \exists x (y \neq 0 \implies xy = 1)##
    is true.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Logic question
  1. Question on fuzy logic (Replies: 1)

Loading...