Questions tagged [propositional-calculus]

Appropriate for questions about truth tables, conjunctive and disjunctive normal forms, negation, and implication of unquantified propositions. Also for general questions about the propositional calculus itself, including its semantics and proof theory. Questions about other kinds of logic should use a different tag, such as (logic), (predicate-logic), or (first-order-logic).

Propositional logic is a branch of logic dealing with logical connectives and statements involving them. A logical connective connects finitely many sentences and forms a compound sentence, in a way that the truth value of the compound sentence depends only on the truth value of its constituents. The most common connectives are the binary connectives conjunction ($\land$), disjunction ($\lor$) and implication ($\rightarrow$), the unary connective negation ($\neg$), and the nullary connectives true ($\top$) and false ($\bot$).

Any proposition is considered to be either atomic (in which case it has no constituents) or compound (in which case it's formed by mean a connective using simpler propositions). A propositional model is a function assigning to each atomic proposition a truth value $0$ or $1$. The truth values of compound propositions are then determined by the truth values of their constituents. For example, if $I$ is a function assigning truth values to propositions, one would have $I(\top)=1$, $I(\bot)=0$, $I(\neg A)=1-I(A)$, $I(A\land B)=\min\big(I(A),I(B)\big)$, $I(A\lor B)=\max\big(I(A),I(B)\big)$ and $I(A\rightarrow B)=\max\big(1-I(A),I(B)\big)$. The propositions having the value $1$ for every model, are called tautologies, and those having the value $0$ for every model, are called absurdities. A central task of propositional logic is characterizing tautologies and absurdities.

5541 questions
20
votes
5 answers

What is Validity and Satisfiability in a propositional statement?

I tend to see these words a lot in Discrete Mathematics. I assumed these were just simple words until I bumped into a question. Is the following proposition Satisfiable? Is it Valid? $(P \rightarrow Q) \Leftrightarrow (Q \rightarrow R ) $ Then I…
Vishnu Vivek
  • 1,441
8
votes
2 answers

Using the distributivity law for propositional logic

I know how to use the standard rule $$p\vee (q\wedge r)\equiv (p\vee q)\wedge (p\vee r)$$ but what if I have a two by two statement like: $$(p\vee q)\wedge (r\vee s)$$ ... I'm guessing that it follows a similar rule to the FOIL method in algebra? I…
Mirrana
  • 9,009
7
votes
6 answers

Simplify, equivalent for (p ∨ ¬q) ∧ (¬p ∨ ¬q)

In my text book I'm asked to deduce a simpler expression for (p ∨ ¬q) ∧ (¬p ∨ ¬q) Looking at an equivalency table I did, it seems p ∨ ¬q gives the same results as (p ∨ ¬q) ∧ (¬p ∨ ¬q). However I'm not sure how you would deduce this without the…
Ari
  • 199
7
votes
2 answers

How to prove logical consequence?

How do you guys prove for logical consequence? My teacher said a truth table can be done. But I don't understand how to infer from truth tables to establish logical consequences. The definition in my course book says: Let F1 and F2 be two…
uohzxela
  • 1,637
6
votes
1 answer

How do I translate $ [(P \Rightarrow Q) \land (Q \Rightarrow T)] \Rightarrow T$ into English?

In his book, Axioms & Set Theory, Robert Andre introduces logic with this statement: If $Q$ is true whenever $P$ is true, and $T$ is true whenever $Q$ is true, then $T$ is true whenever $P$ is true. He renders the statement symbolically: $$[(P…
MathAdam
  • 3,309
6
votes
2 answers

Show that {∨, ¬} is adequate.

So, I've been thinking lately on how to show that set {$\lor, \lnot$} is adequate. I've came across few ideas on how I'd have to build my proof, albeit I am not fairly sure how to process nor if my thoughts are good. First, I thought I could rely on…
Foxez
  • 63
5
votes
2 answers

How Many Theorems (Tautologies) Exist of 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 Letters?

Suppose we only have the material conditional C and logical negation N for a system of propositional calculus, with only variables and no constants in any formula. Suppose that formulas like Cpq aren't considered distinct from Cxy or Crs or Cab,…
5
votes
3 answers

Explain the Absorption Law

I am currently in a Discrete Math class and reviewing some of my terminology and I don't really understand the Absorption Law. I am not looking for a proof or a truth table but an explanation in layman's terms. Absorption Law $$ A ∨ (A ∧ B) =…
5
votes
2 answers

Converting text to propositional logic

I'm having trouble representing question # 3 in a propositional logic formula, from these lecture notes on propositional logic and propositional resolution: 3) Formalization and Proof. There are three suspects for a murder: Adams, Brown, and Clark.…
Student
  • 181
5
votes
2 answers

Minimal set of rules of inference?

Although impractical, propositional logic can be formulated with purely the set of logical connectives {$\neg,\rightarrow$} (or even just NAND/NOR), along with a sufficiently large set of propositional atoms, a set of logical axioms commonly stated…
user460377
5
votes
3 answers

Catalogue of propositional logic laws

I have searched for it in Wikipedia and this site and I haven't found it yet. What I have found isn't complete enough -maybe a short list of ten or so equivalence laws, perhaps forgetting all together laws related to other connectors different from…
Javier CF
  • 203
4
votes
5 answers

Convert expression to NAND only

I have to convert the following to NAND only $$\bar{A}\cdot\bar{B}\cdot\bar{C} + A\cdot\bar{B}\cdot C + A\cdot B\cdot \bar{C} + A \cdot B\cdot C$$ I've looked at the following website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAND_logic And it helped me…
4
votes
2 answers

Natural Deduction: $p \to (\neg q \leftrightarrow (r \lor s)), \neg s \vdash (p \land \neg q) \to r$

I have the following formula and need to prove it with natural deduction: $$p \to (\neg q \leftrightarrow (r \lor s)), \neg s \vdash (p \land \neg q) \to r$$ I was able to get the below finished but can't fill in what is missing. 1. p -> (~q <->…
4
votes
2 answers

Is there a name for this property of XOR?

I noticed that XOR ($\oplus$) has a somewhat "mutualistic" property: $\left(\left(A \oplus B\right)\iff C\right) \iff \left(A \iff \left(B \oplus C\right)\right)$ This can be easily checked via a truth table. Saying that if C is equivalent with the…
4
votes
2 answers

Prove p from ¬¬p

I'm stuck on question 2 of these lecture notes on propositional logic: "2. Propositional Proof. Give a formal proof of the sentence p from the single premise ¬¬p using only Modus Ponens and the standard axiom schemata. Warning: This is surprisingly…
Student
  • 181
1
2 3
30 31