CSE 1201

Discrete Mathematics

Lecture 3
Propositional Equivalences

Course Teachers:

Md. Moazzem Hossain, Assistant Professor, CSE

Outlines
Propositional Equivalences
Proof by truth table
Logical Equivalences
Proof by logical Equivalence

2
Propositional Equivalences
Definition

• Compound propositions that have the same truth values in all

possible cases are called logically equivalent.

3
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

L3 5
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

L3 6
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

L3 7
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

L3 8
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

L3 9
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

L3 10
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
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 laws
pqqp Laws ppF

Definition of Definition of Bi-

pq  pq Implication p  q  (p  q)  (q  p) conditional
Logical Equivalences

14
Proof using Logical Equivalence
(p  r)  (q  r)
 ( p  r)  ( q  r) Definition of implication
prqr Associative
pqrr Commutative
 ( p   q)  (r  r) Associative
  (p  q)  r De Morgan, Idempotent

 (p  q)  r Definition of implication
Logical
Example Equivalences : 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 Idempotent
 Tautology byproof
Tautology by proof
[¬p (p q )]q
 [(¬p p)(¬p q)]q Distributive
 [ F  (¬p q)]q Negation
 [¬p q ]q Identity
 ¬ [¬p q ]  q Definition Implication
 [¬(¬p) ¬q ]  q De Morgan
 [p  ¬q ]  q Double Negation
 p  [¬q q ] Associative
 p  [q ¬q ] Commutative
pT Negation
T Domination

L3 17
 What can’t we say?
 Quantification: every student has a father.
 Relations: If X is married to Y, then Y is

married to X.
 Probability: There is an 80% chance of rain.
 Combine Evidence: This car is better than

that one because…

 Uncertainty: Maybe Jony is playing golf.
END