MHB Proving Properties of Lattices: How to Use DeMorgan's Laws

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aryth1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lattice
Aryth1
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
My problem is this:

Let $L$ be a bounded, complemented, distributive lattice and let $x,y,z\in L$. Prove the following:

1. $x\wedge y = \bot \Leftrightarrow x\leq y^c$
2. $x = (x^c)^c$
3. $x\wedge y \leq z \Leftrightarrow y\leq x^c \vee z$
4. $(x\vee y)^c = x^c \wedge y^c$
5. $(x\wedge y)^c = x^c \vee y^c$

The first two I have finished, and the last two are basically DeMorgan's laws. I'm having some trouble with #3. Any help is appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here is one direction of 3:

$y \leq (x^c \vee z) \iff y = y \wedge (x^c \vee z)$

Thus:

$x \wedge y = x \wedge [y \wedge (x^c \vee z)]$

$= x \wedge [(y \wedge x^c) \vee (y \wedge z)]$ (distributive law)

$= [x \wedge (y \wedge x^c) ] \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (distributive law, again)

$ = [x \wedge (x^c \wedge y)] \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (commutativity)

$ = [(x \wedge x^c) \wedge y] \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (associativity)

$ = [0 \wedge y] \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (complement law)

$ = 0 \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (zero law? forget what this is called)

$= x \wedge (y \wedge z)$ (identity law)

$= (x \wedge y) \wedge z$ (associativity)

which shows that $x \wedge y = (x \wedge y) \wedge z$, that is:

$x \wedge y \leq z$

Ask yourself, are these steps reversible?
 
Deveno said:
Here is one direction of 3:

$y \leq (x^c \vee z) \iff y = y \wedge (x^c \vee z)$

Thus:

$x \wedge y = x \wedge [y \wedge (x^c \vee z)]$

$= x \wedge [(y \wedge x^c) \vee (y \wedge z)]$ (distributive law)

$= [x \wedge (y \wedge x^c) ] \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (distributive law, again)

$ = [x \wedge (x^c \wedge y)] \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (commutativity)

$ = [(x \wedge x^c) \wedge y] \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (associativity)

$ = [0 \wedge y] \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (complement law)

$ = 0 \vee [x \wedge (y \wedge z)]$ (zero law? forget what this is called)

$= x \wedge (y \wedge z)$ (identity law)

$= (x \wedge y) \wedge z$ (associativity)

which shows that $x \wedge y = (x \wedge y) \wedge z$, that is:

$x \wedge y \leq z$

Ask yourself, are these steps reversible?

Thanks a lot for your help! I hadn't thought about your first $\iff$. That was what I was missing. I'm learning this on my own with monthly meetings with a professor, so sometimes I don't manage to see simple things. Thank you!
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.

Similar threads

Back
Top