Simplifying compound proposition and Logical equation

Similar documents
2.1 Review. 2.2 Inference and justifications

INTERMEDIATE LOGIC Glossary of key terms

Announcements. CS243: Discrete Structures. First Order Logic, Rules of Inference. Review of Last Lecture. Translating English into First-Order Logic

The way we convince people is generally to refer to sufficiently many things that they already know are correct.

Curriculum Guide for Pre-Algebra

Rosen, Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications, 6th edition Extra Examples

correlated to the Massachussetts Learning Standards for Geometry C14

McDougal Littell High School Math Program. correlated to. Oregon Mathematics Grade-Level Standards

In Alexandria mathematicians first began to develop algebra independent from geometry.

A Judgmental Formulation of Modal Logic

Artificial Intelligence Prof. P. Dasgupta Department of Computer Science & Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur

Logic I or Moving in on the Monkey & Bananas Problem

(Refer Slide Time 03:00)

Is there a good epistemological argument against platonism? DAVID LIGGINS

Haberdashers Aske s Boys School

A Logical Approach to Metametaphysics

An Introduction to. Formal Logic. Second edition. Peter Smith, February 27, 2019

Mathematics. The BIG game Behind the little tricks

Day 3. Wednesday May 23, Learn the basic building blocks of proofs (specifically, direct proofs)

Chapter 3: More Deductive Reasoning (Symbolic Logic)

How Do We Know Anything about Mathematics? - A Defence of Platonism

Review of Philosophical Logic: An Introduction to Advanced Topics *

Artificial Intelligence: Valid Arguments and Proof Systems. Prof. Deepak Khemani. Department of Computer Science and Engineering

When Negation Impedes Argumentation: The Case of Dawn. Morgan Sellers Arizona State University

Semantic Entailment and Natural Deduction

Review for Test III #1

1. Lukasiewicz s Logic

Intersubstitutivity Principles and the Generalization Function of Truth. Anil Gupta University of Pittsburgh. Shawn Standefer University of Melbourne

MATH1061/MATH7861 Discrete Mathematics Semester 2, Lecture 5 Valid and Invalid Arguments. Learning Goals

Predicate logic. Miguel Palomino Dpto. Sistemas Informáticos y Computación (UCM) Madrid Spain

Al-Sijistani s and Maimonides s Double Negation Theology Explained by Constructive Logic

But we may go further: not only Jones, but no actual man, enters into my statement. This becomes obvious when the statement is false, since then

Logic and Ontology JOHN T. KEARNS COSMOS + TAXIS 1. BARRY COMES TO UB

15. Russell on definite descriptions

SUMMARY COMPARISON of 6 th grade Math texts approved for 2007 local Texas adoption

Logical Omniscience in the Many Agent Case

Announcements. CS311H: Discrete Mathematics. First Order Logic, Rules of Inference. Satisfiability, Validity in FOL. Example.

Artificial Intelligence Prof. P. Dasgupta Department of Computer Science & Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur

Verification and Validation

DO YOU KNOW THAT THE DIGITS HAVE AN END? Mohamed Ababou. Translated by: Nafissa Atlagh

Journal of Philosophy, Inc.

UC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016

MISSOURI S FRAMEWORK FOR CURRICULAR DEVELOPMENT IN MATH TOPIC I: PROBLEM SOLVING

Logical Constants as Punctuation Marks

Semantic Foundations for Deductive Methods

Brief Remarks on Putnam and Realism in Mathematics * Charles Parsons. Hilary Putnam has through much of his philosophical life meditated on

On A New Cosmological Argument

Vol 2 Bk 7 Outline p 486 BOOK VII. Substance, Essence and Definition CONTENTS. Book VII

Kripke s skeptical paradox

Math Matters: Why Do I Need To Know This? 1 Logic Understanding the English language

CHAPTER 2 THE LARGER LOGICAL LANDSCAPE NOVEMBER 2017

Articles THE ORIGINS OF THE PROPOSITIONAL FUNCTIONS VERSION OF RUSSELL S PARADOX. Philosophy / U. of Massachusetts

Situations in Which Disjunctive Syllogism Can Lead from True Premises to a False Conclusion

Artificial Intelligence. Clause Form and The Resolution Rule. Prof. Deepak Khemani. Department of Computer Science and Engineering

Fundamentals of Metaphysics

Revisiting the Socrates Example

CHRONOLOGY HARMONIOUS

Conventionalism and the linguistic doctrine of logical truth

Broad on Theological Arguments. I. The Ontological Argument

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC FOR METAPHYSICIANS

Philosophy Epistemology Topic 5 The Justification of Induction 1. Hume s Skeptical Challenge to Induction

Can Gödel s Incompleteness Theorem be a Ground for Dialetheism? *

Grade 6 correlated to Illinois Learning Standards for Mathematics

How I became interested in foundations of mathematics.

What would count as Ibn Sīnā (11th century Persia) having first order logic?

4181 ( 10.5), = 625 ( 11.2), = 125 ( 13). 311 PPO, p Cf. also: All the errors that have been made in this chapter of the

=EQUALS= Center for. A Club of Investigation and Discovery. Published by: autosocratic PRESS Copyright 2011 Michael Lee Round

Conte. Secretary AIPH Committee for Novelty Protection. October 22, George Franke Essentially derived varieties and the perspective of growers Y

CHAPTER 1 A PROPOSITIONAL THEORY OF ASSERTIVE ILLOCUTIONARY ARGUMENTS OCTOBER 2017

KNOWLEDGE AND THE PROBLEM OF LOGICAL OMNISCIENCE

TRUTH IN MATHEMATICS. H.G. Dales and G. Oliveri (eds.) (Clarendon: Oxford. 1998, pp. xv, 376, ISBN X) Reviewed by Mark Colyvan

Introduction to knowability and beyond

Illustrating Deduction. A Didactic Sequence for Secondary School

Resemblance Nominalism and counterparts

YOU TO THE POWER OF ME: U M3

Name: Course: CAP 4601 Semester: Summer 2013 Assignment: Assignment 06 Date: 08 JUL Complete the following written problems:

Informalizing Formal Logic

BonJour Against Materialism. Just an intellectual bandwagon?

Philosophy of Logic and Artificial Intelligence

Dumitrescu Bogdan Andrei - The incompatibility of analytic statements with Quine s universal revisability

CONTENTS A SYSTEM OF LOGIC

The Paradox of Knowability and Semantic Anti-Realism

A Defense of Contingent Logical Truths

Wittgenstein and Gödel: An Attempt to Make Wittgenstein s Objection Reasonable

Natural Deduction for Sentence Logic

An Alternative View of Schizophrenic Cognition

Introduction Symbolic Logic

Lecture Notes on Classical Logic

Ayer on the criterion of verifiability

1/9. The First Analogy

A Guide to FOL Proof Rules ( for Worksheet 6)

Logic & Proofs. Chapter 3 Content. Sentential Logic Semantics. Contents: Studying this chapter will enable you to:

Appeared in: Al-Mukhatabat. A Trilingual Journal For Logic, Epistemology and Analytical Philosophy, Issue 6: April 2013.

How Boole broke through the top syntactic level

The Development of Laws of Formal Logic of Aristotle

FRANK JACKSON AND ROBERT PARGETTER A MODIFIED DUTCH BOOK ARGUMENT. (Received 14 May, 1975)

Philosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy. Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2011

Introducing Our New Faculty

THE RELATION BETWEEN THE GENERAL MAXIM OF CAUSALITY AND THE PRINCIPLE OF UNIFORMITY IN HUME S THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE

Analytic Philosophy IUC Dubrovnik,

Transcription:

Simplifying compound proposition and Logical equation Oh Jung Uk Abstract If is the truth value of proposition then connectives could be translated to arithmetic operation in the congruent expression of 2 as described below. By using this, logical laws could be proved, compound proposition could be simplified, and logical equation could be solved. 1. Introduction We know by or using logical laws, and the use of such karnaughmap in order to simplify the compound proposition. We think the method of using local laws has inconvenience that we need to memorize several logical laws and directions of a connectives, and the method of using karnaughmap has inconvenience of processing of multivariate. For eliminating the inconvenience, we study how to simplify the compound proposition by changing logical connectives to the arithmetic operators of congruent expression. We prove again several logical laws by using this method for helpful. We think that this method will be used to simplifying of logical circuit. We know that the method is not exist how to get the truth value easily if we know the truth value of a certain compound poroposition but the truth value of a certain proposition that make up the compound proposition is not known. If x is a certain proposition that the truth value is not known, we define logical equation as a compound proposition including x. And we study how to get the truth value of x. We don t study in this paper, but we think this method, making use of the matrix, to study value of n variables 1 st order equation would be also meaning. 1

2. Simplifying compound proposition Definition 1. Let us define as a number of truth value of the compound proposition. That is,if is true then, if is false then. Theorem 1. Expression of connectives in the congruent expression of 2 For arbitrary simple proposition, connectives could be expressed to arithmetic operators by using the congruent expression of 2 as described below. Proof 1. Let us define as arbitray simple proposition. If 2

Therefore, for connectives, following formula is satisfied. But, the logical law of for quantifier is maintained. [1] That is, Definition 2. If an arbitray proposition does not have connectives then we could simply express to in the congruent expression of 2 according to theorem 1. But, if has connectives then we could not omit. For example, if does not have connectives then we could express as, otherwise then we could not express as but we could express as where, means a number of truth value of the proposition. Theorem 2. Characteristics of in the congruent expression of 2 For arbitray natural number, proposition, simple proposition, the following equation is satisfied. Proof 2. Let us define as arbitray natural number, as proposition, as simple proposition which does not have connectives. and. So,. Because, and, so,. The above contents could be simply expressed for as described below according to definition 2. 3

Theorem 3. Proving logical laws We could prove logical laws as like Contrapositive Law, De Morgan s Law by using theorem1,theorem2, the congruent expression of 2. Proof 3. Let us define as arbitrary simple proposition. According to theorem 1,theorem 2,definition 2, When Contrapositive Law,, Therefore, and is same, so,. When De Morgan s Law Therefore, and is same,so,. When De Morgan s Law Therefore, and is same,so,. We omit to prove extra logical laws. 4

Theorem 4. Simplifying compound proposition We could simplify compound proposition by using theorem1,theorem2 and the congruent expression of 2. Proof 4. Let us define as compound proposition and as simple proposition. According to theorem1,theorem2 Because could be simplified to. When, according to theorem1,theorem2 Therefore, could be simplified to. We omit to prove extra cases 5

3. Logical equation Definition 3. Let us define Logical equation as the equation included proposition which has unknown truth value and let us define value of as a number of the truth value. And, let us define n variables logical equation as that the logical equation has proposition unknown truth value. For reference, we do not express n variables 1 st order equation, because all of n variables m th order equation is n variables 1 st order equation by according to theorem 2. Theorem 5. 1 varible logical equation For proposition which is known the truth value, proposition which is unknown the truth value, and value of of 1 varible logical equation is as described below, that is, value of is not exist Proof 5. Let us define as the proposition known the truth value, and let us define as the proposition unknown the truth value and let us define as 1 varibles logical equation. and,so, logical equation is satisfied that the truth value of does not care logical equation is not satisfied that has any truth value. is, so, value of is. If we explain the above contents with example then, so,, that is, when,, that is, when, value of is not exist,that is, when,. 6

Theorem 6. 2 variables logical equation For which is known the truth value, which is unknown the truth value, and if we define 2 varibles logical equation as described below then value of is as described below. value of is not exist Proof 6. Let us define as the proposition known the truth value, and let us define as the proposition unknown the truth value and let us define 2 varibles logical equation as described below. If we (6.1)-( 6.2) then,so,according to theorem 5,, and if we arrange then when,that is, when, when in (6.1) and,so, when in (6.1) and,so, when,that is,when, value of is not exist.therefore, value of is not exist,too. when,that is, when,,so, if we apply this to (6.1) then and because,so 7

References [1] You-Feng Lin, Shwu-Yeng T.Lin, translated by Lee Hung Chun, Set Theory, Kyung Moon(2010), pp49 ( This is Korean book. I translate, sorry. Original book is You-Feng Lin, Shwu-Yeng T.Lin, 이흥천옮김, 집합론, 경문사 (2010) ) Oh Jung Uk, South Korea ( I am not in any institutions of mathematics ) E-mail address: ojumath@gmail.com 8