Understanding the truth table of → (implies)

  • Thread starter Thread starter MathWarrior
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Table Truth table
MathWarrior
Messages
267
Reaction score
5
The truth table of it is as follows for reference:

p q p→q
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T

I was wondering anyone can shed some light on an easier way to memorize or think about this then just memorizing the truth table. This seems to be the least intuitive logical function, to understand for me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
"If I win the lottery (P), I will give you a million dollars (Q)."

When did I lie to you?
 
MathWarrior said:
I was wondering anyone can shed some light on an easier way to memorize or think about this then just memorizing the truth table.

It should be easy to memorize since there is only one way to make "p implies q" false.

It will be easier to understand when you study statement-functions that have a variable and are quantifed by "for each". For example " for each number x , if x > 0 then x^3 > 0". If someone says "No! That's false. Suppose x = -1", we don't consider that such an example makes the statement false. The only way to show such a quantified statement is false is to provide an example where the "if..." part is true and the "then..." part is false.

("p implies q" has the same meaning as "if p then q".)
 
A slightly different way to look at it than Stephen Tashi described is this.

p q p→q
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T

For the first two rows, the implication is true when both p and q are true, and the implication is false when p is true but q is false.
For the 3rd and 4th rows, when p is false, the implication is defined to be true, regardless of the value of q.

Using johnqwertyful's example, the only scenario that you would have a complaint about (i.e., that his implication is false) is when he actually does win the lottery (P is true), but he doesn't give you the million dollars (Q is false).

If he hasn't won the lottery, could give you the money or not give you the money, and the implication would still be considered true.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top