1
$\begingroup$

Negating $w_t \cdot x < w_t\cdot x_t \text{ for some } t \text{ s.t. } y_t> y$, does the rightmost inequality become $\leq$?

So I believe I can write this as: $$ \exists t \ni y_t>y, x\cdot w_t < x_t \cdot w_t $$ for which I believe the negation is $$\tag{1} \forall t \ni y_t>y, x\cdot w_t \geq x_t \cdot w_t $$ What I am asking in this question is whether $(1)$ is the correct negation, or if the correct negation is $$\tag{2} \forall t \ni y_t\leq y, x\cdot w_t \geq x_t \cdot w_t $$ (or something else). The reason I am a bit confused is because I think where I have commas I should have ands ($\wedge$), which would then become ors, in which case I think that $(2)$ may actually be the correct negation. (but I tried writing the truth tables and having an and ($\wedge$) with the $\forall$ doesn't make sense).

Thanks.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

So your initial statement is "there exists $t$ with $y_t>y$ such that $w_t\cdot x<w_t\cdot x_t$".

The negation is "there DOESN'T EXIST $t$ with $y_t>y$ such that $w_t\cdot x<w_t\cdot x_t$".

Therefore, "for any $t$ with $y_t>y$ that you try, you will have $w_t\cdot x\geq w_t\cdot x_t$".

So, formally, "$\forall t$ s.t. $y_t>y$, $w_t\cdot x\geq w_t\cdot x_t$".

The statement is not saying anything about $t$ in which $y_t\leq y$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.