Simple Discrete Structures problem

Firestrider
Messages
104
Reaction score
0
OK this is the first assignment I have in this class and I can't figure out how to negate and simplify the logical structure of W <--> S (bi-conditional implication)

I got this so far:

~[(W --> S) ^ (S --> W)] by Definition
~(W --> S) v ~(S --> W) by DeMorgan's Law
~(~W v S) v ~(~S v W) by Simplification of Implication

I just don't know where to go to from here. I know the end result would make W <--> S equivalent to W (XOR) S.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why the "~"? I would start with (W--> S)^(S-->W).

Now remember that A-->B is the same as Bv(~A).
 
Well the problem says to find the simplified negation, so I thought that meant to negate then simplify. So I negated the whole thing with ~
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
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...
Back
Top