Chapter 1: (Part 2) : The Foundations: Logic and Proofs: Propositional Equivalence

Chapter 1: (Part 2):
The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
 Propositional Equivalence
(Section 1.2)
 Predicates & Quantifiers

(Section 1.3)
© by Kenneth H. Rosen, Discrete Mathematics & its Applications, Sixth Edition, Mc Graw-Hill, 2007
1
Propositional Equivalences (1.2)
 A tautology is a proposition which is always true .

Classic Example: P V P
 A contradiction is a proposition which is always

false .
Classic Example: P  P
 A contingency is a proposition which neither a

tautology nor a contradiction.
Example: (P V Q)  R
CS 210, Ch.1 (part 2): The foundations: Logic & Proof, Sets, and Functions
2
Propositional Equivalences (1.2) (cont.)
 Two propositions P and Q are logically equivalent if

P  Q is a tautology. We write:
PQ
3

 Example:
(P  Q)  (Q  P)  (P  Q)
 Proof:
 The left side and the right side must have the same truth
values independent of the truth value of the component
propositions.
 To show a proposition is not a tautology: use an

abbreviated truth table
 try to find a counter example or to disprove the assertion.
 search for a case where the proposition is false
4
 Case 1: Try left side false, right side true
Left side false: only one of PQ or Q P need be

false.
1a. Assume PQ = F.

Then P = T , Q = F. But then right side PQ = F.
Wrong guess.
1b. Try Q P = F. Then Q = T, P = F. Then

PQ = F. Another wrong guess.
5
Propositional Equivalences (1.2)

 Case 2. Try left side true, right side false
If right side is false, P and Q cannot have the same truth
value.
2a. Assume P =T, Q = F.
Then PQ = F and the conjunction must be false so the left
side cannot be true in this case. Another wrong guess.
2b. Assume Q = T, P = F.
Again the left side cannot be true. We have exhausted all
possibilities and not found a counterexample. The two
propositions must be logically equivalent.
Note: Because of this equivalence, if and only if or iff is

also stated as is a necessary and sufficient condition for.
6
Equivalence Name
PTP Identity Laws
PVFP
PVTT Domination Laws
PFF
PVPP Idempotent Laws
PPP
 ( P)  P Double Negation
Law
PVQQVP Commutative Law

PQQP
7
Equivalence Name
(P V Q) V R Associative Law
 P V (Q V R)
P V (Q  R) Distributive Law
 (P V Q)  (P V R)
(P  Q)  P V Q De Morgan’s Laws
(P V Q)  P  Q
P  Q  P V Q Implication
Equivalence
P  Q  Q  P Contrapositive Law
Note: equivalent expressions can always be substituted for each other in a more
complex expression - useful for simplification.
8

 Normal or Canonical Forms
 Unique representations of a proposition
 Examples: Construct a simple proposition of two

variables which is true only when
 P is true and Q is false: P  Q

 P is true and Q is true: P  Q
 P is true and Q is false or P is true and Q is true:

(P  Q) V (P  Q)
9
 A disjunction of conjunctions where
 every variable or its negation is represented once in each

conjunction (a minterm)
 each minterms appears only once

Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF)
 Important in switching theory, simplification in the design

of circuits.
10
 Method: To find the minterms of the DNF.
 Use the rows of the truth table where the proposition is 1

or True
 If a zero appears under a variable, use the negation of

the propositional variable in the minterm
 If a one appears, use the propositional variable.
11

 Example: Find the DNF of (P V Q) R
P Q R (P V Q) R
0 0 0 1
0 0 1 1
0 1 0 1
0 1 1 0
1 0 0 1
1 0 1 0
1 1 0 1
1 1 1 0
12

 There are 5 cases where the proposition is true, hence 5
minterms. Rows 1,2,3, 5 and 7 produce the following
disjunction of minterms:
(P V Q) R
 (P  Q  R) V (P  Q  R) V (P  Q  R)
V (P  Q  R) V (P  Q  R)
 Note that you get a Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) if

you negate a DNF and use DeMorgan’s Laws.
13
Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3)

 A generalization of propositions - propositional
functions or predicates: propositions which contain
variables
 Predicates become propositions once every variable

is bound- by
 assigning it a value from the Universe of Discourse U
or
 quantifying it
14
Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3) (cont.)

 Examples:
 Let U = Z, the integers = {. . . -2, -1, 0 , 1, 2, 3, . . .}
 P(x): x > 0 is the predicate. It has no truth value until the

variable x is bound.
 Examples of propositions where x is assigned a value:

 P(-3) is false,
 P(0) is false,
 P(3) is true.
 The collection of integers for which P(x) is true are the

positive integers.
15

 P(y) V P(0) is not a proposition. The variable y
has not been bound. However, P(3) V P(0) is a
proposition which is true.
 Let R be the three-variable predicate R(x, y z):

x+y=z
 Find the truth value of

R(2, -1, 5), R(3, 4, 7), R(x, 3, z)
16

 Quantifiers
 Universal
P(x) is true for every x in the universe of discourse.

Notation: universal quantifier
x P(x)
‘For all x, P(x)’, ‘For every x, P(x)’
The variable x is bound by the universal quantifier

producing a proposition.
17
 Example: U = {1, 2, 3}
x P(x)  P(1)  P(2)  P(3)
18

 Quantifiers (cont.)
 Existential
 P(x) is true for some x in the universe of discourse.

Notation: existential quantifier
x P(x)
‘There is an x such that P(x),’ ‘For some x, P(x)’, ‘For

at least one x, P(x)’, ‘I can find an x such that P(x).’
Example: U={1,2,3}
x P(x)  P(1) V P(2) V P(3)
19

 Quantifiers (cont.)
 Unique Existential
P(x) is true for one and only one x in the universe of

discourse.
Notation: unique existential quantifier

!x P(x)
‘There is a unique x such that P(x),’ ‘There is one and

only one x such that P(x),’ ‘One can find only one x
such that P(x).’
20

 Example: U = {1, 2, 3, 4}
P(1) P(2) P(3) !xP(x)
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1
0 1 0 1
0 1 1 0
1 0 0 1 How many
1 0 1 0 minterms are
1 1 0 0 in the DNF?
1 1 1 0
21
REMEMBER!
A predicate is not a proposition until all variables

have been bound either by quantification or
assignment of a value!
22

 Equivalences involving the negation operator
(x P(x ))  x P(x)
(x P(x))  x P(x)
 Distributing a negation operator across a quantifier

changes a universal to an existential and vice
versa.
 (x P(x))  (P(x1)  P(x2)  …  P(xn))

 P(x1) V P(x2) V … V P(xn)
 x P(x)
23

 Multiple Quantifiers: read left to right . . .
 Example: Let U = R, the real numbers,

P(x,y): xy= 0
x y P(x, y)
x y P(x, y)
x y P(x, y)
x y P(x, y)
The only one that is false is the first one.

What’s about the case when P(x,y) is the predicate
x/y=1?
24

 Multiple Quantifiers: read left to right . . .
 Example: Let U = {1,2,3}. Find an expression equivalent
to x y P(x, y) where the variables are bound by
substitution instead:
Expand from inside out or outside in.
Outside in:
y P(1, y)  y P(2, y)  y P(3, y)

[P(1,1) V P(1,2) V P(1,3)] 
[P(2,1) V P(2,2) V P(2,3)] 
[P(3,1) V P(3,2) V P(3,3)]
25

 Converting from English (Can be very difficult!)
“Every student in this class has studied calculus”

transformed into:
“For every student in this class, that student has studied

calculus”
C(x): “x has studied calculus”

x C(x)
This is one way of converting from English!
26

 Multiple Quantifiers: read left to right . . . (cont.)
 Example:
F(x): x is a fleegle
S(x): x is a snurd
T(x): x is a thingamabob
U={fleegles, snurds, thingamabobs}
(Note: the equivalent form using the existential quantifier is also

given)
27
 Everything is a fleegle
x F( x)
  (x F(x))
 Nothing is a snurd.
x  S(x)
  (x S( x))
 All fleegles are snurds.

x [F(x)S(x)]
 x [F(x) V S(x)]
 x  [F(x)  S(x)]
  (x [F(x) V S(x)])
28

 Some fleegles are thingamabobs.
x [F(x)  T(x)]
 (x [F(x) V T(x)])
 No snurd is a thingamabob.
x [S(x) T(x)]
 (x [S(x )  T(x)])
 If any fleegle is a snurd then it's also a thingamabob

x [(F(x)  S(x))  T(x)]
 (x [F(x)  S(x)  T( x)])
29

 Extra Definitions:
 An assertion involving predicates is valid if it is true for

every universe of discourse.
 An assertion involving predicates is satisfiable if there is a

universe and an interpretation for which the assertion is
true. Else it is unsatisfiable.
 The scope of a quantifier is the part of an assertion in

which variables are bound by the quantifier
30

 Examples:
Valid: x S(x)  [x S( x)]
Not valid but satisfiable: x [F(x)  T(x)]
Not satisfiable: x [F(x)  F(x)]
Scope: x [F(x) V S( x)] vs. x [F(x)] V x [S(x)]
31

 Dangerous situations:
 Commutativity of quantifiers
x y P(x, y) y x P( x, y)?
YES!
x y P(x, y)  y x P(x, y)?
NO!
DIFFERENT MEANING!
 Distributivity of quantifiers over operators

x [P(x)  Q(x)]  x P( x)  x Q( x)?
YES!
x [P( x)  Q( x)] [x P(x)  x Q( x)]?
NO!
32
Sets (1.6)
 A set is a collection or group of objects or elements

or members. (Cantor 1895)
 A set is said to contain its elements.
 There must be an underlying universal set U, either

specifically stated or understood.
33
Sets (1.6) (cont.)

 Notation:
 list the elements between braces:

S = {a, b, c, d}={b, c, a, d, d}
(Note: listing an object more than once does not change the set.
Ordering means nothing.)
 specification by predicates:
S= {x| P(x)},
S contains all the elements from U which make the predicate P
true.
 brace notation with ellipses:

S = { . . . , -3, -2, -1},
the negative integers.
34
Sets (1.6) (cont.)

 Common Universal Sets
 R = reals
 N = natural numbers = {0,1, 2, 3, . . . }, the counting
numbers
 Z = all integers = {. . , -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, . .}
 Z+ is the set of positive integers
 Notation:
x is a member of S or x is an element of S:
x  S.
x is not an element of S:
x  S.
35
Sets (1.6) (cont.)

 Subsets
 Definition: The set A is a subset of the set B, denoted
A  B, iff
x [x  A  x  B]
 Definition: The void set, the null set, the empty set,
denoted , is the set with no members.
Note: the assertion x   is always false. Hence

x [x    x  B]
is always true(vacuously). Therefore,  is a subset of
every set.
Note: A set B is always a subset of itself.

36
Sets (1.6) (cont.)
 Definition: If A  B but A  B the we say A is a proper

subset of B, denoted A  B (in some texts).
 Definition: The set of all subset of a set A, denoted P(A),

is called the power set of A.
 Example: If A = {a, b} then

P(A) = {, {a}, {b}, {a,b}}
37
Sets (1.6) (cont.)

 Definition: The number of (distinct) elements in A,
denoted |A|, is called the cardinality of A.
If the cardinality is a natural number (in N), then the

set is called finite, else infinite.
 Example: A = {a, b},

|{a, b}| = 2,
|P({a, b})| = 4.
A is finite and so is P(A).
Useful Fact: |A|=n implies |P(A)| = 2n
38
Sets (1.6) (cont.)

 N is infinite since |N| is not a natural number. It is called a transfinite
cardinal number.
 Note: Sets can be both members and subsets of other sets.
 Example:
A = {,{}}.
A has two elements and hence four subsets:
, {}, {{}}. {,{}}
Note that  is both a member of A and a subset of A!
 Russell's paradox: Let S be the set of all sets which are not members
of themselves. Is S a member of itself?
 Another paradox: Henry is a barber who shaves all people who do

not shave themselves. Does Henry shave himself?
39
Sets (1.6) (cont.)

 Definition: The Cartesian product of A with B, denoted
A x B, is the set of ordered pairs {<a, b> | a  A  b  B}
Notation: n
 Ai   a1 , a 2 ,...,a n  a i  Ai 
i 1
Note: The Cartesian product of anything with  is . (why?)
 Example:
A = {a,b}, B = {1, 2, 3}
AxB = {<a, 1>, <a, 2>, <a, 3>, <b, 1>, <b, 2>, <b, 3>}
What is BxA? AxBxA?
 If |A| = m and |B| = n, what is |AxB|?


Chapter 1: (Part 2) : The Foundations: Logic and Proofs: Propositional Equivalence

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 1: (Part 2) : The Foundations: Logic and Proofs: Propositional Equivalence

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 1: (Part 2):

The Foundations: Logic and Proofs

 Predicates & Quantifiers

Propositional Equivalences (1.2)

 A tautology is a proposition which is always true .

 A contradiction is a proposition which is always

 A contingency is a proposition which neither a

Propositional Equivalences (1.2) (cont.)

 Two propositions P and Q are logically equivalent if

Propositional Equivalences (1.2) (cont.)

 To show a proposition is not a tautology: use an

Propositional Equivalences (1.2) (cont.)

 Case 1: Try left side false, right side true

Left side false: only one of PQ or Q P need be

1a. Assume PQ = F.

1b. Try Q P = F. Then Q = T, P = F. Then

Propositional Equivalences (1.2)

Note: Because of this equivalence, if and only if or iff is

PVQQVP Commutative Law

Propositional Equivalences (1.2) (cont.)

 Unique representations of a proposition

 Examples: Construct a simple proposition of two

 P is true and Q is false: P  Q

 P is true and Q is false or P is true and Q is true:

Propositional Equivalences (1.2) (cont.)

 A disjunction of conjunctions where

 every variable or its negation is represented once in each

 each minterms appears only once

 Important in switching theory, simplification in the design

Propositional Equivalences (1.2) (cont.)

 Method: To find the minterms of the DNF.

 Use the rows of the truth table where the proposition is 1

 If a zero appears under a variable, use the negation of

 If a one appears, use the propositional variable.

Propositional Equivalences (1.2) (cont.)

Propositional Equivalences (1.2) (cont.)

 Note that you get a Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) if

Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3)

 Predicates become propositions once every variable

 assigning it a value from the Universe of Discourse U

Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3) (cont.)

 Let U = Z, the integers = {. . . -2, -1, 0 , 1, 2, 3, . . .}

 P(x): x > 0 is the predicate. It has no truth value until the

 Examples of propositions where x is assigned a value:

 The collection of integers for which P(x) is true are the

Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3) (cont.)

 Let R be the three-variable predicate R(x, y z):

 Find the truth value of

Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3) (cont.)

P(x) is true for every x in the universe of discourse.

‘For all x, P(x)’, ‘For every x, P(x)’

The variable x is bound by the universal quantifier

Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3) (cont.)

x P(x)  P(1)  P(2)  P(3)

Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3) (cont.)

 P(x) is true for some x in the universe of discourse.

‘There is an x such that P(x),’ ‘For some x, P(x)’, ‘For

Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3) (cont.)

P(x) is true for one and only one x in the universe of

Notation: unique existential quantifier

‘There is a unique x such that P(x),’ ‘There is one and

Predicates & Quantifiers (1.3) (cont.)

P(1) P(2) P(3) !xP(x)