| Line 5: | 
Line 5: | 
|   | ==Place for Discussion==  |   | ==Place for Discussion==  | 
|   |  |   |  | 
| − | <math>\ldots\!</math>  | + | <br><math>\ldots</math><br>  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | ==Logical Equivalence Problem==  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | * [http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=6513648&tstart=0 Problem posted by Mike1234 on the Discrete Math list at the Math Forum].  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | * [http://mathforum.org/kb/plaintext.jspa?messageID=6514666 Solution posted by Jon Awbrey, working by way of logical graphs].  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | <pre>  | 
|   | + | Date: 30 Nov 2008, 2:00 AM  | 
|   | + | Author: Jon Awbrey  | 
|   | + | Subject: Re: logical equivalence problem  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | required to show:  ~(p <=> q) is equivalent to (~q) <=> p  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | in logical graphs, the required equivalence looks like this:  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + |       q o   o p           q o  | 
|   | + |         |   |               |  | 
|   | + |       p o   o q             o   o p  | 
|   | + |          \ /                |   |  | 
|   | + |           o               p o   o--o q  | 
|   | + |           |                  \ /   | 
|   | + |           @         =         @  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | we have a theorem that says:  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + |         y o                xy o  | 
|   | + |           |                   |  | 
|   | + |         x @        =        x @  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | see: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Logical_graph#C2.__Generation_theorem  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | applying this twice to the left hand side of the required equation:  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + |       q o   o p          pq o   o pq  | 
|   | + |         |   |               |   |  | 
|   | + |       p o   o q           p o   o q  | 
|   | + |          \ /                 \ /  | 
|   | + |           o                   o  | 
|   | + |           |                   |  | 
|   | + |           @         =         @  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | by collection, the reverse of distribution, we get:  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + |           p   q  | 
|   | + |           o   o  | 
|   | + |        pq  \ /   | 
|   | + |         o   o  | 
|   | + |          \ /  | 
|   | + |           @  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | but this is the same result that we get from one application of  | 
|   | + | double negation to the right hand side of the required equation.  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | QED  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | Jon Awbrey  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | PS.  I will copy this to the Inquiry List:  | 
|   | + |      http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/  | 
|   | + |      since I know it preserves the trees.  | 
|   | + |    | 
|   | + | o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o  | 
|   | + | </pre>  |