Truth table and proving a tautology

  • Thread starter Thread starter arnold28
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Table Truth table
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving that a given logical statement is a tautology using a truth table. The statement in question is (p -> ((p OR q) AND ~q)) = ((~p OR ~q) AND p).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to construct a truth table to demonstrate that the statement is not a tautology, noting discrepancies in the truth values of both sides of the equation. Some participants question the placement of parentheses in the expression to be proven.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring the correctness of the original poster's approach and the clarity of the exercise's wording. There is no explicit consensus on the validity of the original poster's findings or the exercise itself.

Contextual Notes

The original poster references an exercise paper as the source of the expression, which may imply constraints on how the problem is interpreted or approached.

arnold28
Messages
14
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I'm supposed to prove that this statement is a tautology (with truth table):

(p -> ((p OR q) AND ~q)) = (~p OR ~q) AND p


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Code:
p | q | ~p | ~q | p OR q | (p OR q) AND ~q | p -> ((p OR q) AND ~q) | (~p OR ~q) | (~p OR ~q) AND p
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1   1    0    0      1            0                      0                 0               0
1   0    0    1      1            1                      1                 1               1
0   1    1    0      1            0                      1                 1               0
0   0    1    1      0            0                      1                 1               0

But here cleary is that it is not tautology, because left side of equation gets 0 1 1 1 and right side 0 1 0 0

So where did i make mistake, because i can't see it
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you sure you have the parentheses right in the expression that is to be proven?
 
yes, it is just like that in the exercise paper
 
so do you think that I have done it right and the exercise is badly worded?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K