Proving Logical Equivalence with Algebraic Substitutions

In summary, to prove the logical equivalence between (p v ~q) v ~q → (r v p) ∧ ~q and ~r v q → (q v p) ∧ (~p v ~q), you can use algebraic substitutions by replacing the implication relation with its equivalent form ~x V y and then simplify each side using De Morgan's theorems.
  • #1
psu12
1
0
Hi, I have to prove the following logical equivalence using algebraic substitutions:

(p v ~q) v ~q → (r v p) ∧ ~q ≡ ~r v q → (q v p) ∧ (~p v ~q)

I've already done the truth table for this problem and proved they are logically equivalent but am not sure how to go about using algebraic substitution. The first step I did was changing the if then by using the definition of 'v' but get stuck where to go after that..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi psu12. http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5725/red5e5etimes5e5e45e5e25.gif

You can replace the implication relation on each side, using this equivalence:

x → y ⇔ ~x V y

Then methodically simplify each side using De Morgan's theorems.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

1. What does it mean to prove logical equivalence with algebraic substitutions?

Proving logical equivalence with algebraic substitutions is a method used in symbolic logic to show that two logical statements are equivalent. This means that they have the same truth value, regardless of the values assigned to the variables in the statements. It involves using algebraic techniques, such as substitution and simplification, to transform one statement into the other.

2. Why is it important to prove logical equivalence with algebraic substitutions?

Proving logical equivalence with algebraic substitutions is important because it allows us to determine whether two statements are logically equivalent without having to evaluate all possible truth values. This can be especially useful in complex logical arguments, where evaluating all possible truth values may be impractical or impossible.

3. What are some common algebraic techniques used in proving logical equivalence?

Some common algebraic techniques used in proving logical equivalence include substitution, simplification, distribution, and De Morgan's laws. These techniques allow us to manipulate logical statements and show that they are equivalent to one another.

4. How can proving logical equivalence with algebraic substitutions be applied in real-world scenarios?

Proving logical equivalence with algebraic substitutions can be applied in various real-world scenarios, such as in computer programming, circuit design, and legal arguments. In computer programming, it can be used to optimize code and improve efficiency. In circuit design, it can be used to simplify complex circuits. In legal arguments, it can be used to show that two legal statements are equivalent and have the same meaning.

5. Are there any limitations to proving logical equivalence with algebraic substitutions?

While proving logical equivalence with algebraic substitutions is a useful tool, it does have some limitations. It can only be applied to statements that are in symbolic form, and it may not be applicable in all situations. Additionally, it requires a strong understanding of symbolic logic and algebraic techniques, which may be challenging for some individuals.

Similar threads

Direct Proof that every zero of p(T) is an eigenvalue of T
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
24
Views
792
Prove the 2nd axiom of mathematical logic using the Deduction Theorem
    • General Math
Replies
1
Views
828
Discrete Mathmatics :logically equivalent
    • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
7
Views
4K
Use mathematical logic to prove this proposition
    • General Math
Replies
1
Views
726
Thermodynamics Energy transfer question
    • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
1K
Engineering Equivalent resistance of an envelope peak detector (RF CMOS)
    • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
713
Prove 9 is eigenvalue of ##T^2\iff## 3 or -3 eigenvalue of ##T##.
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
520
Logic: proof that [p -> (q ^ r)] <=> [(p ^ -q) -> r]
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
What is the change in internal energy after two processes?
    • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
1K
Removing negations using logical equivalences
    • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top