Undergrad Need help solving this Existence Algorithm for truth

  • Thread starter Thread starter ollieha
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around a complex equation involving existential quantifiers and logical operations. The user is uncertain about the solvability of the expression (x ¬ | ∃x) and its implications regarding the existence of x independent of its reference. The equation presented is (x ¬ | ∃x) = ∅ ⊕ {∅}) ⊕ ∅. The user expresses confusion about whether there are scenarios where x can exist independently. The thread is currently closed for mentor review.
ollieha
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Need help solving algorithm for truth
I have an equation that I need some serious help with. I’m using a “not such that”, and I don’t know if the critical component (x ¬ | ∃x) is solvable!

Well here it is:

(x ¬ | ∃x) = ∅ ⊕ {∅}) ⊕ ∅

So if x exists independently from the reference of x, the first bit is true, but is there ever a time when that is the case?

So confused-
Oliver
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thread is closed temporarily for Mentor review...
 
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K