Scribd
Upload
13 views1 page

2018 - 5336 - Quantifier Equivalence - Collaborate

The document discusses the logical equivalence of quantifiers, specifically examining the statements ∀x(P(x) → Q(x)) and ∀xP(x) → ∀xQ(x), concluding they are not equivalent through examples. It also analyzes the equivalence of ∃x(P(x) ∨ Q(x)) and ∃xP(x) ∨ ∃xQ(x) while stating that ∃x(P(x) ∧ Q(x)) and ∃xP(x) ∧ ∃xQ(x) are not equivalent. Additionally, it mentions the use of truth tables to determine propositional equivalences and identifies tautologies.

Uploaded by

Ishan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
13 views1 page

2018 - 5336 - Quantifier Equivalence - Collaborate

The document discusses the logical equivalence of quantifiers, specifically examining the statements ∀x(P(x) → Q(x)) and ∀xP(x) → ∀xQ(x), concluding they are not equivalent through examples. It also analyzes the equivalence of ∃x(P(x) ∨ Q(x)) and ∃xP(x) ∨ ∃xQ(x) while stating that ∃x(P(x) ∧ Q(x)) and ∃xP(x) ∧ ∃xQ(x) are not equivalent. Additionally, it mentions the use of truth tables to determine propositional equivalences and identifies tautologies.

Uploaded by

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

Equivalence using quantifiers.

1.4 #43 : Are


∀xPx → Qx and ∀xPx → ∀xQx
logically equivalent? Obviously not. Let Px stand for "x is German" and Qx stand for
"x likes Sauerkraut" then
∀xPx → Qx stands for "all Germans like Sauerkraut"
while
∀xPx → ∀xQx stands for "if everybody is German then everybody likes Sauerkraut"
The book gives as answer for this problem: Let Px be any propositional function that
is sometimes true and sometimes false and let Qx be any propositional function that
is always false. Then ∀xPx → Qx is false, namely where Px is true, but
∀xPx → ∀xQx is true, because ∀xPx is false.
To be concrete, let D  a, b and let a be German and b not German. Both don’t like
Sauerkraut. Then ∀xPx → Qx is false, at a, but ∀xPx → ∀xQx is true. In order
to make ∀xPx → Qx false, we only need that Qa is false.
For a more mathematical example, we could chose D  ℕ  natural numbers, Px  x
is prime, Qx  x  0. Then ∀xPx → ∀xQx is true, because not every number x is
prime, and ∀xPx → Qx is false, where x is prime.
If we have that Px is always true then ∀xPx → Qx is true in case that Qx is true
for all x. Then ∀xPx → Qx and ∀xPx → ∀xQx are equivalent, namely to ∀xQx.
In our German example, being German would be equivalent to liking sauerkraut.

1.4 #45 states that ∃xPx ∨ Qx and ∃xPx ∨ ∃xQx are equivalent:∃xPx ∨ Qx
is true iff for some x  c we have that Pc or Qc is true iff ∃xPx or ∃xQx hold.
Are ∃xPx ∧ Qx and ∃xPx ∧ ∃xQx equivalent. Obviously not. Let D  ℕ  natural
numbers and Px  "x is even", Qx " x is odd" . Then ∃xPx ∧ ∃xQx is true but
∃xPx ∧ Qx is never true.

Propositional equivalences can always be determined by setting up truth tables. A


propositional function fp 1 , . . . , p n  which is always true, like f p  p ∨ p , is called a
tautology. Setting up a truth table for fp 1 , . . . , p n  decides whether fp 1 , . . . , p n  is a
tautology or not. This is the only general method to decide whether a given
propositional function is a tautology. If you already know that fp 1 , . . . , p n  is a tautology
then making fp 1 , . . . , p n   F may quickly yield a contradiction.

You might also like