| Line 19: |
Line 19: |
| | * [http://mathforum.org/kb/plaintext.jspa?messageID=6514666 Solution posted by Jon Awbrey, working in the medium of logical graphs]. | | * [http://mathforum.org/kb/plaintext.jspa?messageID=6514666 Solution posted by Jon Awbrey, working in the medium 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. |
| | | | |
| − | required to show: ~(p <=> q) is equivalent to (~q) <=> p
| + | In logical graphs, the required equivalence looks like this: |
| − | | |
| − | in logical graphs, the required equivalence looks like this:
| |
| | | | |
| | + | <pre> |
| | q o o p q o | | q o o p q o |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| Line 37: |
Line 32: |
| | | \ / | | | \ / |
| | @ = @ | | @ = @ |
| | + | </pre> |
| | | | |
| − | we have a theorem that says:
| + | We have a theorem that says: |
| | | | |
| | + | <pre> |
| | y o xy o | | y o xy o |
| | | | | | | | |
| | x @ = x @ | | x @ = x @ |
| | + | </pre> |
| | | | |
| − | see: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Logical_graph#C2.__Generation_theorem
| + | See [http://www.mywikibiz.com/Logical_graph#C2.__Generation_theorem Logical Graph : C<sub>2</sub>. Generation Theorem]. |
| | | | |
| − | applying this twice to the left hand side of the required equation:
| + | Applying this twice to the left hand side of the required equation, we get: |
| | | | |
| | + | <pre> |
| | q o o p pq o o pq | | q o o p pq o o pq |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Line 55: |
Line 54: |
| | | | | | | | |
| | @ = @ | | @ = @ |
| | + | </pre> |
| | | | |
| − | by collection, the reverse of distribution, we get:
| + | By collection, the reverse of distribution, we get: |
| | | | |
| | + | <pre> |
| | p q | | p q |
| | o o | | o o |
| Line 64: |
Line 65: |
| | \ / | | \ / |
| | @ | | @ |
| | + | </pre> |
| | | | |
| − | but this is the same result that we get from one application of
| + | But this is the same result that we get from one application of double negation to the right hand side of the required equation. |
| − | double negation to the right hand side of the required equation. | |
| | | | |
| | QED | | QED |
| Line 72: |
Line 73: |
| | Jon Awbrey | | Jon Awbrey |
| | | | |
| − | PS. I will copy this to the Inquiry List: | + | PS. I will copy this to the [http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ Inquiry List], since I know it preserves the trees. |
| − | http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
| |
| − | since I know it preserves the trees.
| |
| − | | |
| − | o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
| |
| − | </pre>
| |
| | | | |
| | ===Discussion=== | | ===Discussion=== |