Scribd
Upload
5 views19 pages

2.Lecture 2 Propositional Equivalence

The document discusses propositional equivalences in discrete mathematics, defining terms such as tautology, contradiction, and contingency. It explains how to demonstrate tautologies using truth tables and logical equivalences, and provides examples of logical equivalences and laws. Additionally, it includes a proof example to show that a specific proposition is a tautology.

Uploaded by

karim22214121074
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
5 views19 pages

2.Lecture 2 Propositional Equivalence

The document discusses propositional equivalences in discrete mathematics, defining terms such as tautology, contradiction, and contingency. It explains how to demonstrate tautologies using truth tables and logical equivalences, and provides examples of logical equivalences and laws. Additionally, it includes a proof example to show that a specific proposition is a tautology.

Uploaded by

karim22214121074
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 19

DISCRETE MATHEMATICS

LECTURE #2

1
Propositional Equivalences
SOME COMMON TERMS
Tautology
A compound proposition that is always true, no matter what the
truth values of the propositional variables that occur in it, is called a
tautology.

Contradiction
A compound proposition that is always false is called a
contradiction.
Contingency
A compound proposition that is neither a tautology nor a
contradiction is called a contingency.
EXAMPLE
Tautology
p  ¬p

Contradiction
p  ¬p

Contingency
p  ¬p

4
TAUTOLOGY
Demonstrate that
[¬p (p q )]q
is a tautology in two ways:
1. Using a truth table – show that [¬p (p q )]q is always
true
2. Using a proof (will get to this later).

5
TAUTOLOGY BY TRUTH TABLE
p q ¬p p q ¬p (p q ) [¬p (p q )]q

T T

T F

F T

F F

8/10/2023 6
TAUTOLOGY BY TRUTH TABLE
p q ¬p p q ¬p (p q ) [¬p (p q )]q

T T F T F T

T F F T F T

F T T T T T

F F T F F T

8/10/2023 7
PROPOSITIONAL EQUIVALENCES
Definition

• Compound propositions that have the same truth values in all


possible cases are called logically equivalent.

8
PROPOSITIONAL EQUIVALENCES : HOW TO
PROVE?
 Two methods:
 Using truth tables
 Not good for long formula
 In this course, only allowed if specifically stated!

 Using the logical equivalences


 The preferred method
 p q  ¬q¬p
 (p  r)  (q  r)  (p  q)  r
LOGICAL EQUIVALENCE USING TRUTH
TABLE
The easiest way to check for logical equivalence
is to see if the truth tables of both variants have
identical last columns. (p q  ¬q¬p)

p q p q p q ¬q ¬p ¬q¬p

8/10/2023 10
LOGICAL EQUIVALENCE USING TRUTH
TABLE

The easiest way to check for logical


equivalence is to see if the truth tables
of both variants have identical last
columns:
p q p q p q ¬q ¬p ¬q¬p
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T

8/10/2023 11
LOGICAL EQUIVALENCE USING TRUTH
TABLE

The easiest way to check for logical


equivalence is to see if the truth tables
of both variants have identical last
columns:
p q p q p q ¬q ¬p ¬q¬p
T T T T T
T F F T F
F T T F T
F F T F F

8/10/2023 12
LOGICAL EQUIVALENCE USING TRUTH
TABLE

The easiest way to check for logical


equivalence is to see if the truth tables
of both variants have identical last
columns:
p q p q p q ¬q ¬p ¬q¬p
T T T T T F
T F F T F T
F T T F T F
F F T F F T

8/10/2023 13
LOGICAL EQUIVALENCE USING TRUTH
TABLE

The easiest way to check for logical


equivalence is to see if the truth tables
of both variants have identical last
columns:
p q p q p q ¬q ¬p ¬q¬p
T T T T T F F
T F F T F T F
F T T F T F T
F F T F F T T

8/10/2023 14
LOGICAL EQUIVALENCE USING TRUTH
TABLE

The easiest way to check for logical


equivalence is to see if the truth tables
of both variants have identical last
columns:
p q p q p q ¬q ¬p ¬q¬p
T T T T T F F T
T F F T F T F F
F T T F T F T T
F F T F F T T T

8/10/2023 15
TRUTH TABLE SOLUTION
 (p  r)  (q  r)  (p  q)  r

p q r p→r q →r pq (p→r)(q →r) (pq) →r

T T T T T T T T
T T F F F T F F
T F T T T F T T
T F F F T F T T
F T T T T F T T
F T F T F F T T
F F T T T F T T
F F F T T F T T
Logical Equivalences
pTp (p  q)  r  p  (q  r)
Identity Laws Associative laws
pFp (p  q)  r  p  (q  r)

pTT p  (q  r)  (p  q)  (p  r)
Domination Law Distributive laws
pFF p  (q  r)  (p  q)  (p  r)

ppp Idempotent  (p  q)   p   q
De Morgan’s laws
ppp Laws  (p  q)   p   q

Double p  (p  q)  p
( p)  p negation law
Absorption laws
p  (p  q)  p

pqqp Commutative ppT


Negation lows
pqqp Laws ppF

Definition of Definition of
pq  pq Implication p  q  (p  q)  (q  p) Biconditional
Logical Equivalences : Example
EXAMPLE
 Show that (p  q)  (p  q) is a Tautology. (Proof)

(p  q)  (p  q)
 (p  q)  (p  q) Implication
 ( p   q)  (p  q) De Morgan
 ( p  p)  ( q  q) Commutative, Associative
TT Negation
T Identity
Thank you

You might also like