Solving Logical Notation Problems Using Propositional Connectives & Quantifiers

  • Thread starter p4nda
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Notation
In summary, the purpose of using propositional connectives and quantifiers in logical notation problems is to represent logical relationships between statements and to make logical arguments more concise and precise. These symbols allow us to manipulate and evaluate complex logical statements in a systematic way. Propositional connectives are symbols that connect two or more statements to form a compound statement, while quantifiers are symbols that indicate the quantity or scope of a statement. The most common propositional connectives are "and" (∧), "or" (∨), and "not" (¬), while the most common quantifiers are "for all" (∀) and "there exists" (∃). To solve a logical notation problem, one must identify the propositional connectives and
  • #1
p4nda
16
0
I need help on converting these to the correct logical notation form using only the propositional connectives and the quantifiers. I'd appreciate if there are some explanation for the reasons of converting in such ways.


This is what I got so far:
(a) Problem: A ⊆ B ∩ C
What I tried getting: ∀x(x ∈ A → x ∈ B ∧ x ∈ C)

(b) Problem: A ⊆ {x, y}
What I tried getting (incomplete... don't understand the {x, y} part): ∀x(x ∈ A → ... )

(c) Problem: A = ø
What I tried getting (don't understand this one, either): ∃x(x ¬∈ A)

(d) Problem: A = {x}
What I tried getting (incomplete): ∀x(x ∈ A ⇔ ...)


These are the examples given:
(a) Problem: A ⊆ B
Converted to: ∀x(x ∈ A → x ∈ B)

(b) Problem: A ∩ B ≠ ø
Converted to: ∃x(x ∈ A ∧ x ∈ B)


Thanks, your help would be greatly appreciated. :)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
(b) {x,y} is just the set consisting of the elements x and y.

(c) your statement doesn't describe "A is the empty set." Try again.

(d) you need to say that every element of A is an element of {x}; that is, x is the only element of A.
 
  • #3
I'm pretty new to this... so I don't really know the symbols for representing everything. But I'll give it another try. :)

(b) ∀x(x ∈ A → x ^ y)

^ I don't know the symbol for "set," do I just leave it as it is "{x, y}?"

(c) ∀x(x ¬∈ A) or ¬∃x(x ∈ A)

(d) ∀x(x ∈ A)
 
Last edited:
  • #4
p4nda said:
I'm pretty new to this... so I don't really know the symbols for representing everything. But I'll give it another try. :)

(b) ∀x(x ∈ A → x ^ y)

^ I don't know the symbol for "set," do I just leave it as it is "{x, y}?"
Yes; so you will have [itex]\forall x (x\in A\Rightarrow x \in \{x,y\})[/itex]

(c) ∀x(x ¬∈ A) or ¬∃x(x ∈ A)
I don't know whether you're allowed to use "not in". An alternative expression is [itex]\forall x(x\in A^{c})[/itex]
(d) ∀x(x ∈ A)

Try using a different letter. What can you say for every y that is in A?
 
  • #5
(d) ∀x(z ∈ A ⇔ z = x)
 
  • #6
p4nda said:
(b) ∀x(x ∈ A → x ^ y)

I'm really uncomfortable with the use of x for a particular value as well as one of your bound values. I'd prefer
[tex]\forall z (z\in A\Rightarrow z\in\{x,y\})[/tex]
or
[tex]\forall z (z\in A\Rightarrow(z=x\vee z=y)[/tex].
 
  • #7
p4nda said:
(d) ∀x(z ∈ A ⇔ z = x)

Close. This could also describe the empty set; you should rule this out.
 
  • #8
for the one A equals the empty set, use the example AB equals the empty set and make the necessary substitution.
 
  • #9
Here we go. I don't know how to do the coding, so I'll try to spell everything out and then give formulae that look like what should be written.

(a) A is a subset of the intersection of B and C. Therefore all the members of A are in both B and C.
(Ax)[(x E A) --> ((x E B) & (x E C))]
'For all X, if X is an element of A then both X is an element of B and X is an element of C.'

(b) A is a subset of {x,y}. All elements of A are either x or y.
(Az)[(z E A)-->(z=x) v (z=y)]
'For all Z, if Z is an element of A then Z is either identical to X or identical to Y.'

(c) A is the null set.
(Ax)~[x E A]
For all X, it is not the case that x is an element of A.

(d) A is a set consisting of one element: x.
(Ex)(Ay)[(x E A) & ((y E A) --> (y=x))]
There exists an X, and for all Y, X is an element of A, and if Y is an element of A then y is identical to X.

Hope this helps.
 

1. What is the purpose of using propositional connectives and quantifiers in logical notation problems?

The purpose of using propositional connectives and quantifiers in logical notation problems is to represent logical relationships between statements and to make logical arguments more concise and precise. These symbols allow us to manipulate and evaluate complex logical statements in a systematic way.

2. How do propositional connectives and quantifiers differ from each other?

Propositional connectives are symbols that connect two or more statements to form a compound statement, while quantifiers are symbols that indicate the quantity or scope of a statement. In other words, propositional connectives show how multiple statements are related, while quantifiers specify how many or how often a statement is true.

3. What are the most common propositional connectives and quantifiers?

The most common propositional connectives are "and" (∧), "or" (∨), and "not" (¬). These symbols are used to represent logical operations such as conjunction, disjunction, and negation, respectively. The most common quantifiers are "for all" (∀) and "there exists" (∃), which indicate universal and existential quantification, respectively.

4. How do you solve a logical notation problem using propositional connectives and quantifiers?

First, identify the propositional connectives and quantifiers present in the problem. Then, use logical rules and laws to manipulate and simplify the statements. Finally, use truth tables or logical equivalences to determine the truth value of the compound statement.

5. What are some common mistakes to avoid when solving logical notation problems?

Some common mistakes to avoid when solving logical notation problems include misinterpreting the meaning of propositional connectives and quantifiers, applying incorrect logical rules or laws, and making errors in truth table construction or evaluation. It is important to carefully read and understand the problem, and to double-check the steps and calculations to ensure accuracy.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
817
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
228
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
15
Views
998
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
964
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
10
Views
933
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
687
Back
Top