Im having difficulty with this. Ive been able to go from
((q and(p implies ~q)) implies ~p) to ~(~p and q) or ~p
Not sure whats next. Can I get some help please.
|
Im having difficulty with this. Ive been able to go from ((q and(p implies ~q)) implies ~p) to ~(~p and q) or ~p Not sure whats next. Can I get some help please. |
|||||
|
|
There are many ways to show that the following is a tautology. There are five example techniques, however, the last one is just a kind of teaser. $$q \land(p \implies \neg q) \implies \neg p$$ 1. Brute-force checking, there are only 2 variables, so only $4 = 2^2$ possibilities to check. 2. Use the fact that $$\alpha \implies \beta \quad \text{ is equivalent to } \quad \neg\alpha \lor \beta $$ and then expand $$ \neg(q \land (\neg p \lor \neg q)) \lor \neg p$$ and simplify the formula using De Morgan laws $$ \neg(q \land \neg (p \land q)) \lor \neg p$$ $$ \neg q \lor (p \land q) \lor \neg p$$ $$ (p \land q) \lor \neg p \lor \neg q $$ $$ (p \land q) \lor \neg (p \land q) $$ 3. Use the contrapositive statement, that is $$\alpha \implies \beta \quad \text{ is equivalent to } \quad \neg\beta \implies \neg \alpha $$ for example $$q \land(p \implies \neg q) \implies \neg p$$ $$q \land(q \implies \neg p) \implies \neg p$$ and conclude that it is a tautology by using modus ponens. 4. Use the fact that the only way $$q \land(p \implies \neg q) \implies \neg p$$ could fail is when $p$ is true. However, $p \implies \neg q$ equals then $\neg q$ and the premise could be simplified to $q \land \neg q$ which is obviously false and thus the whole implication holds. 5. Use Curry-Howard isomorphism, that is rewrite $$q \land(p \implies \neg q) \implies \neg p$$ into this type $$q \times (p \to (q \to \bot)) \to (p \to \bot)$$ and prove by providing an element $$\lambda \langle q, f \rangle.\ \lambda p.\ f\ p\ q$$ of the required type and thus showing that it is inhabited. Cheers! |
|||
|
|
|
$$(q~\wedge(p\to\sim q))\equiv(q~\wedge(\sim p\vee \sim q))\equiv(q~\wedge\sim p)\vee(q~\wedge\sim q)\equiv (q~\wedge\sim p)\vee F\equiv q~\wedge\sim p$$ and so $$(q~\wedge(p\to\sim q))\to\sim p\equiv~ \sim(q~\wedge\sim p)\vee\sim p\equiv\sim q$$ Do the same calculation for RHS and see $\sim q\to\sim q$. |
|||
|
|
|
There are only 4 possible assignments to $(p,q)$. Check that the two formulae match for each assignment. |
|||
|
|