Rewrite as a formal proposition

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ash1
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on rewriting a complex conditional statement involving three variables: G ("I eat apples"), B ("I eat durians"), and P ("I eat rambutans") into a formal proposition. The statement asserts that if one fruit is consumed, the others will not be, culminating in the assertion that at least one of the fruits will be eaten. Additionally, participants are tasked with creating a truth table for the proposition and determining if it is a contradiction. The discussion also addresses the identification of tautologies and the necessity of providing logical proofs without relying on truth tables.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of propositional logic and formal propositions
  • Familiarity with truth tables and logical operators
  • Knowledge of tautologies and their proofs in logic
  • Basic skills in discrete mathematics
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn how to construct formal propositions from natural language statements
  • Study the principles of creating truth tables for logical expressions
  • Explore methods for proving tautologies using logical rules
  • Investigate common logical fallacies and contradictions in propositional logic
USEFUL FOR

Students of discrete mathematics, educators teaching logic, and anyone interested in formal logic and propositional reasoning will benefit from this discussion.

ash1
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Kindly solve for me this question with proper working.

A) Rewrite the following sentence as a formal proposition.
" If i eat apples, then i will not eat durian, and if i eat durians, then i will not eat rambutans, and if i eat rambutans, then i will not eat apples, but i will surely eat either apples, durians or rambutans.

Let G =" i eat apples", B=" i eat durians," P=" i eat rambutans".

B) Write a truth table for the proposition in (a). Is it a contradiction?

C) Which of the following are tautologies? if the statement is a tautology, give a proof using the appropriate rules of logic.(Avoid using truth tables if possible.) If it is not a tautology, then justify your answer by giving an appropriate example.

i) p(p q)
ii) ( ( p v q v r) ^ (p r) ^ (q r )) r
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello and welcome to MHB, ash! :D

When you have a problem with which you need assistance, please to not submit it as a POTW candidate. That form is for people who have a problem that they think would make a good problem of the week, and for which they already have the solution.

So, I have moved your question here.

You will likely find the following thread to be useful:

http://mathhelpboards.com/discrete-mathematics-set-theory-logic-15/rewrite-following-sentence-formal-proposition-12846.html

For the remainder, please post what you have done so far, so our helpers know where you are stuck and can help you get past that point.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K