Scribd
Upload
91 views

Logical Laws

The document discusses logical equivalences for propositional logic. It presents three tables: Table 6 lists common logical equivalences like the identity laws, domination laws, idempotent laws, and De Morgan's laws. Table 7 gives equivalences involving conditional statements, such as showing that a conditional is equivalent to its contrapositive and that a disjunction is equivalent to a conditional with a negated antecedent. Table 8 provides equivalences involving biconditionals, including showing that a biconditional is equivalent to the conjunction of the corresponding conditionals in both directions.

Uploaded by

johago7938
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
91 views

Logical Laws

The document discusses logical equivalences for propositional logic. It presents three tables: Table 6 lists common logical equivalences like the identity laws, domination laws, idempotent laws, and De Morgan's laws. Table 7 gives equivalences involving conditional statements, such as showing that a conditional is equivalent to its contrapositive and that a disjunction is equivalent to a conditional with a negated antecedent. Table 8 provides equivalences involving biconditionals, including showing that a biconditional is equivalent to the conjunction of the corresponding conditionals in both directions.

Uploaded by

johago7938
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

1.

3 Propositional Equivalences 29

TABLE 6 Logical Equivalences.


Equivalence Name
p∧T≡p Identity laws
p∨F≡p

p∨T≡T Domination laws


p∧F≡F

p∨p≡p Idempotent laws


p∧p≡p

¬(¬p) ≡ p Double negation law

p∨q≡q∨p Commutative laws


p∧q≡q∧p

(p ∨ q) ∨ r ≡ p ∨ (q ∨ r) Associative laws
(p ∧ q) ∧ r ≡ p ∧ (q ∧ r)

p ∨ (q ∧ r) ≡ (p ∨ q) ∧ (p ∨ r) Distributive laws
p ∧ (q ∨ r) ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r)

¬(p ∧ q) ≡ ¬p ∨ ¬q De Morgan’s laws


¬(p ∨ q) ≡ ¬p ∧ ¬q

p ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p Absorption laws
p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ p

p ∨ ¬p ≡ T Negation laws
p ∧ ¬p ≡ F

The identities in Table 6 Table 6 contains some important equivalences. In these equivalences, T denotes the com-
are a special case of pound proposition that is always true and F denotes the compound proposition that is always
Boolean algebra
identities found in Table
false. We also display some useful equivalences for compound propositions involving condi-
5 of Section 12.1. See tional statements and biconditional statements in Tables 7 and 8, respectively. The reader is
Table 1 in Section 2.2 asked to verify the equivalences in Tables 6–8 in the exercises.
for analogous set
identities.

TABLE 7 Logical Equivalences TABLE 8 Logical


Involving Conditional Equivalences Involving
Statements. Biconditional Statements.
p → q ≡ ¬p ∨ q p ↔ q ≡ (p → q) ∧ (q → p)
p → q ≡ ¬q → ¬p p ↔ q ≡ ¬p ↔ ¬q
p ∨ q ≡ ¬p → q p ↔ q ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (¬p ∧ ¬q)
p ∧ q ≡ ¬(p → ¬q) ¬(p ↔ q) ≡ p ↔ ¬q
¬(p → q) ≡ p ∧ ¬q
(p → q) ∧ (p → r) ≡ p → (q ∧ r)
(p → r) ∧ (q → r) ≡ (p ∨ q) → r
(p → q) ∨ (p → r) ≡ p → (q ∨ r)
(p → r) ∨ (q → r) ≡ (p ∧ q) → r

You might also like