1. Given the following predicates and premises: C(x): “ x is in this class” R(x): “ x owns a yellow truck” T(x): “ x has gotten a parking ticket.” Premises C(Linda), R(Linda) , ∀x(R(x) → T(x)) Conclude that ∃x(C(x) ∧ T(x))
2.Find the error/s in this argument that shows that if ∃xP(x) ∧ ∃xQ(x) is true then ∃x(P(x) ∧ Q(x)) is true.
1. ∃xP(x) ∧ ∃xQ(x) Premise
2. ∃xP(x) Simplification from (1)
3. P(c) Existential instantiation from (2)
4. ∃xQ(x) Simplification from (1)
5. Q(c) Existential instantiation from (4)
6. P(c) ∧ Q(c) Conjunction from (3) and (5)
7. ∃x(P(x) ∧ Q(x)) Existential generalization
Q1.
We have been given that:
Q.E.D.
if (R(x) → T(x)) for all x
& R(c) is true for some constant c then,
T(c) is also true.
If T(x) is true and C(x) is also true then,
C(x) ∧ T(x) is also true for any x
A(k) is true for some constant k then,
A(x) is also true for some x OR ∃x(A(x)) is true
(Thank You!)
1. Given the following predicates and premises: C(x): “ x is in this class” R(x): “...
Identify the error or erors in this argument that supposedly shows that if xA) A 3xG is true, then 3A)A G) is true. 18 1. 3XAA x 2. 3xA 3. Rd 4. 3xC 5. ad 6. AdA aa 7. 3MAMA Q) Premise Simplification from (1) Existential instantiation from (2) Simplification from (1) Existential instantiation from (4) 011748 Conjunction from (3) and (5) Existential generalization Multiple Choice The error is in step 5, we cannot assume that the cthat makes Ptrue...
1. Use a truth table to find if the following is valid or not valid: p → r q → r q ˅ ¬r Therefore, ¬p Valid Not Valid Discrete Math 2. Indicate whether each expression is an equivalence of the following: p ˄ q p ˅ q p → q ¬(p → q) (p ˄ q) ˅ (p ˄ q) ¬ (¬p ˅ ¬q) 3. For the given values for p, q, and r,...
5. Symbolize the following argument and prove it is a valid argument. Let B ( x ) = x is a bear; D ( x ) = x is dangerous, and H ( x ) = x is hungry. Every bear that is hungry is dangerous. There is a hungry animal that is not dangerous. Therefore there is an animal that is not a bear. 6. In order to prove an quantificational argument invalid it is only necessary to find a...
How to do this problem for
discrete math.
Use the rules of inference to show that if V x (Ax) v α刈and V xứcAx) Λ α where the domains of all quantifiers are the same. Construct your argument by rearranging the following building blocks. ) → Rx)) are true, then V x("A(x) → A is also tr 1. We will show that if the premises are true, then (1A(a) → Pla) for every a. 2. Suppose -R(a) is true for...
4. [7 marks] Choosing a universe and predicates. (a) Consider the following statement: Vx EN, P(r, 165)P(x,1) Provide one definition of a binary predicate P over Nx N that makes the above statement True, and another definition of P that makes the statement False. Briefly justify your answers, but no formal proofs are necessary b) Consider the following statement: Provide one definition of a non-empty set U, and predicates P, Q, and R over U, that makes the above statement...
Using inference rules
Show that the argument form with premises (p t) rightarrow (r s), q rightarrow (u t), u rightarrow p, and s and conclusion q rightarrow r is valid by first using Exercise 11 and then using rules of inference from Table 1.
1. Formalize the following argument by using the given predicates and then rewriting the argument as a numbered sequence of statements. Identify each statement as either a premise, or a conclusion that follows according to a rule of inference from previous statements. In that case, state the rule of inference and refer by number to the previous statements that the rule of inference used.Lions hunt antelopes. Ramses is a lion. Ramses does not hunt Sylvester. Therefore, Sylvester is not an...
Prove that each of the following conclusions (C) follows from the given premises. P1: (Ǝx)(P(x) ∧ (∀y)(B(y) ⇒ R(x,y))) P2: ~(Ǝx)(Ǝy)(P(x) ∧ F(y) ∧ R(x,y)) P3: (∀y) (F(y) ⇒ B(y)) C: ~(Ǝx)F(x)
a set of premises and a conclusion are given. Use the valid argument forms listed in Table 2.3.1 to deduce the con- clusion from the premises, giving a reason for each step as in Example 2.3.8. Assume all variables are statement variables a. p b. rVS с. ~s ~t n. или Example 2.3.8 Application: A More Complex Deduction You are about to leave for school in the morning and discover that you don't l glasses. You know the following statements...
Let p and q be the following statements. p: Ravi is going to work on Monday. q: We are going to the museum. Consider this argument Premise 1: If Ravi is going to work on Monday, then we are going to the museum. Premise 2: Ravi is not going to work on Monday. Conclusion: Therefore, we are not going to the museum. (a) Write the argument in symbolic form. Premise 1: р 9 Premise 2: 0 Conclusion: - 0 DAD...