MHB Predicate logic with multiple quantifiers

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around finding specific predicates P(x,y) within the domain D={1,2,3} that satisfy certain logical conditions involving quantifiers. The first question seeks an example where for every x there exists a y making P(x,y) true, but there is no single y that works for all x. The second question asks if it's possible to find a predicate where there exists a y for all x making P(x,y) true, while the opposite condition fails. Participants emphasize the importance of context and prior work in formal logic to guide the search for suitable predicates. Understanding the dependency of y on x in these statements is crucial for finding valid examples.
brynjolf23
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone. This is my first post on this forum. Thank you for taking the time to help me with my question.
I have no idea where to start. :(

Question 1:
Find an example of a predicate P(x,y) where the domain of x and y are D such that
$\forall x \in D, \exists y \in D, P(x,y)$ is true but $\exists y \in D, \forall x \in D, P(x,y)$ is false.

Let D={1,2,3}

Question 2:
Is it possible to find a predicate P(x,y) such that:
$\exists y \in D, \forall x \in D, P(x,y)$ is true but $\forall x \in D, \exists y \in D, P(x,y)$ is false

Let D={1,2,3}

Question 3:
Is there any method of finding a suitable predicate? or do i just have to guess my way through?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi brynjolf23 and welcome to MHB!

I've placed the appropriate delimiters around your LaTeX code. They are (for this site)

\$...\$ - for inline text

\$\$...\$\$ or [math]...[/math] - for text on a newline in 'full' mode.

You can display inline text in full mode by preceding a set of commands with '\displaystyle'.

Thanks and enjoy the forum!
 
brynjolf23 said:
Hello everyone. This is my first post on this forum. Thank you for taking the time to help me with my question.
I have no idea where to start. :(

Question 1:
Find an example of a predicate P(x,y) where the domain of x and y are D such that
$\forall x \in D, \exists y \in D, P(x,y)$ is true but $\exists y \in D, \forall x \in D, P(x,y)$ is false.

Let D={1,2,3}

Question 2:
Is it possible to find a predicate P(x,y) such that:
$\exists y \in D, \forall x \in D, P(x,y)$ is true but $\forall x \in D, \exists y \in D, P(x,y)$ is false

Let D={1,2,3}

Question 3:
Is there any method of finding a suitable predicate? or do i just have to guess my way through?
Hi,

To be able to help you, we need to know the context of your questions. That is why we ask you to show any work you have done (even if it is wrong); at least, you should tell us what you are studying. This is specially important in formal logic, since there are several methods of deduction.

In this case, to get you started, I can offer an informal description. Both statements are about finding pairs $(x,y)$ that make $P(x,y)$ true. In the first statement, $\forall x \exists y\, P(x,y)$ you can find, for each $x$, at least one $y$ that makes $P(x,y)$ true. Note that each $y$ may depend on $x$.

On the other hand, in the statement $\exists y\forall x\, P(x,y)$, there must be a single $y$ that works for all $x$.
 
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
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K