PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum (http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/index.php)
-   Off-Topic Discussion (http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   logicians, check this out (http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/showthread.php?t=256138)

TheDon 07-05-2009 01:34 PM

logicians, check this out
 
Question 13
Given that p is true, q is false, and r is true, complete the one line truth table for:


p q r (p → ~p) V r


p q r (p → ~p) V r

T F T F T F T T


p q r (p → ~p) V r

T F T F F F T T


p q r (p → ~p) V r

T F T F T F F T


p q r (p → ~p) V r

T F T F T F F T
Question 14

Given that p is true, q is false, and r is true, complete the one line truth table for:

~r ↔ (q V p)


p q r ~ r ↔ (q V p)

T F T F T T T F


p q r ~ r ↔ (q V p)

T F T F F T F F


p q r ~ r ↔ (q V p)

T F T F T T F F


p q r ~ r ↔ (q V p)

T F T F F T T F



if you know your logic you would see an issue here... I think, I am most certain these questions are wrong since if you see the cases do not stay the same even though they are established prior to the problem.

the answers are below the problems

OldPokey 07-05-2009 01:57 PM

p q r (p → ~p) V r

That's just silly. p = true always means ~p = false, so that equation is false. Since the next operator is a logical disjunction, and r is true, the result of the entire equation is true.

~r ↔ (q V p)

since r is true, ~r is false.
since p is true, q V p is true
false ↔ true = true
so the result is true.

The rest is just semantics.

RichC 07-05-2009 02:01 PM

Dang, its been a long time since I studied logic.

I think I have forgotten most of what I learned then.

Matt L 07-05-2009 02:05 PM

(a -> b) is equivalent to (~a V b). So (p -> ~p) is equivalent to (~p V ~p) which is simply ~p. Is that correct?

TheDon 07-05-2009 02:11 PM

The truth values are incorrect.. its just a one level truth table with the truth values given... where the p is listed as false in the first problem its defined as True!!!! regardless.. its a simple problem that should not be over complicated by any outside forces.. Am I correct?

MTUpower 07-06-2009 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichC (Post 2240064)
Dang, its been a long time since I studied logic.

I think I have forgotten most of what I learned then.

:shocked2:

Kuan 07-06-2009 11:56 AM

Here is how you do it. First you have these rules.

P -> Q is false only once, when P is True and Q is false.

P & Q is true only once, when both P and Q are true.

P v Q is false only once, when both P and Q are false, or, only one variable needs to be true in order for the statement to be true.

P <-> Q is true only when both P, Q, have the same values. ie., when P and Q are True then the <-> is true.

So first, fill in underneath your P, Q, and R, your given values. So

Code:

(p → ~p) V r

T      F    T

Then you fill in the values for the operators -> and v.

So

p -> ~p is false, so fill in F under the conditional arrow.

Code:

(p → ~p) V r

T      F    T

  F

r is true, so as per the rule, that a disjunction only needs one variable true to be true, fill in T underneath the v sign.

Code:

(p → ~p) V r

T      F    T

  F

          T

So the statement is True.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:46 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2026 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website