For Friday, read Chapter 4, section 4.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TRUTH TABLES The general truth tables for each of the connectives tell you the value of any possible statement for each of the connectives. Negation.
Advertisements

PROOF BY CONTRADICTION
Chapter 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof.
For Wednesday, read Chapter 3, section 4. Nongraded Homework: Problems at the end of section 4, set I only; Power of Logic web tutor, 7.4, A, B, and C.
3.3 Divisibility Definition If n and d are integers, then n is divisible by d if, and only if, n = dk for some integer k. d | n  There exists an integer.
Reading: Chapter 4, section 4 Nongraded Homework: Problems at the end of section 4. Graded Homework #4 is due at the beginning of class on Friday. You.
Proof by Deduction. Deductions and Formal Proofs A deduction is a sequence of logic statements, each of which is known or assumed to be true A formal.
No new reading for Monday or Wednesday Exam #2 is next Friday, and we’ll review and work on proofs on Monday and Wed.
For Friday, read Chapter 3, section 4. Nongraded Homework: Problems at the end of section 4, set I only; Power of Logic web tutor, 7.4, A, B, and C. Graded.
Accelerated Math I Unit 2 Concept: Triangular Inequalities The Hinge Theorem.
Logic and Philosophy Alan Hausman PART ONE Sentential Logic Sentential Logic.
CHAPTER 1: Points, Lines, Planes, and Angles
Methods of Proofs PREDICATE LOGIC The “Quantifiers” and are known as predicate quantifiers. " means for all and means there exists. Example 1: If we.
Postulates and Paragraph Proofs Section 2-5.  postulate or axiom – a statement that describes a fundamental relationship between the basic terms of geometry.
Logical Reasoning:Proof Prove the theorem using the basic axioms of algebra.
Introduction to Derivations in Sentential Logic PHIL 121: Methods of Reasoning April 8, 2013 Instructor:Karin Howe Binghamton University.
Today’s Topics Introduction to Proofs Rules of Inference Rules of Equivalence.
Chapter Five Conditional and Indirect Proofs. 1. Conditional Proofs A conditional proof is a proof in which we assume the truth of one of the premises.
Ch 1.4: Basic Proof Methods I A theorem is a proposition, often of special interest. A proof is a logically valid deduction of a theorem, using axioms,
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Chapter 2: The Logic of Quantified Statements. Predicate Calculus Instructor: Hayk Melikya 2.3.
CS6133 Software Specification and Verification
Proof By Contradiction Chapter 3 Indirect Argument Contradiction Theorems and pg. 171.
Of 38 lecture 13: propositional logic – part II. of 38 propositional logic Gentzen system PROP_G design to be simple syntax and vocabulary the same as.
Postulates and Theorems Relating Points, Lines, and Planes
2.3 Methods of Proof.
1.What is the difference between a paragraph proof and a column proof? 2.True or False: If a quadrilateral is a square, then all four sides are congruent.
Thinking Mathematically Logic 3.4 Truth Tables for the Conditional and Biconditional.
Bellwork Write if-then form, converse, inverse, and contrapositive of given statement. 3x - 8 = 22 because x = 10.
The Logic of Conditionals Chapter 8 Language, Proof and Logic.
Foundations of Discrete Mathematics Chapter 1 By Dr. Dalia M. Gil, Ph.D.
More Proofs. REVIEW The Rule of Assumption: A Assumption is the easiest rule to learn. It says at any stage in the derivation, we may write down any.
EXAMPLE 3 Write an indirect proof Write an indirect proof that an odd number is not divisible by 4. GIVEN : x is an odd number. PROVE : x is not divisible.
Chapter 1 Logic and Proof.
Chapter 1 Logic and Proof.
Chapter 2 Sets and Functions.
Section 2.3 – Deductive Reasoning
2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic 2012 Pearson Education, Inc.
Introduction to Logic PHIL 240 Sections
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic 2012 Pearson Education, Inc.
Module #10: Proof Strategies
Proof That There Is No Smallest Number
Elementary Metamathematics
7.1 Rules of Implication I Natural Deduction is a method for deriving the conclusion of valid arguments expressed in the symbolism of propositional logic.
An indirect proof uses a temporary assumption that
No new reading for Monday. Exam #2 is Wednesday.
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic © 2008 Pearson Addison-Wesley.
CS 270 Math Foundations of CS
Natural Deduction.
Chapter 1 Logic and Proof.
Midterm Discussion.
CSS 342 Data Structures, Algorithms, and Discrete Mathematics I
Unit 3 Section 3 Logic: Intro to Proofs.
Computer Security: Art and Science, 2nd Edition
Module #10: Proof Strategies
Geometry.
Statements of Symbolic Logic
Foundations of Discrete Mathematics
Introductory Logic PHI 120
Section 3.3 Truth Tables for the Conditional and Biconditional
Proof by Induction L.O. All pupils understand proof by induction
Arguments in Sentential Logic
For Wednesday, read Chapter 4, section 3 (pp )
Chapter 5 Parallel Lines and Related Figures
Chapter 2: Geometric Reasoning
5.1 Indirect Proof Let’s take a Given: Prove: Proof: Either or
Perpendicular and Parallel Lines
Introductory Logic PHI 120
11.4 Mathematical Induction
Presentation transcript:

For Friday, read Chapter 4, section 4. Exam #2 is Wednesday and will cover Chapter 3, sections 1-4, and Chapter 4, sections 1-4. Monday will be devoted to review – mostly to doing proofs.

→Introduction j (j) p Assumption . a1,…,an (k) q {a1,…,an}/j (m) p → q j, k →I j > k, j < k, or j = k

What Do the Symbols Mean? To say that j > k or j = k is to say that the assumption can come after the line that becomes the consequent or that j and k can be the very same line. a1,…,an refers to the lines on which the thing that becomes the consequent depends. {a1,…,an}/j means “remove j from that set, if it’s in there” The line that becomes the antecedent is always an assumption. As an assumption, it depends only on itself.

Semantic vs. Deductive Consequences ‘p1…pn |= q’ says that it is impossible for p1…pn to be true while q is false. This double-turnstile says that the statement on the right is a semantic consequence of the statement(s) on the left. ‘p1…pn |- q’ (which is called a ‘sequent’) says that q can be derived from p1…pn using some particular natural deduction system (NK, in our case). It says that q is a deductive consequence of p1…pn.

Proving Theorems So, ‘|- q’, with no premises given on the left, means that q can be derived within our system from no premises at all. Statements that can be derived from no premises are the theorems of our natural deduction system. In sentential logic, the set of theorems is identical to the set of tautologies (assuming we have a complete natural deduction system).

How to Prove Theorems Always start by making an assumption. Let the conclusion (the theorem) be your guide. If the theorem is a conditional, start by assuming its entire antecedent. Then proceed with your proof, making other assumptions where necessary. When you arrive at the desired theorem, if you’ve done the proof properly, it should have no dependence lines listed off to its left.

Exercises on p. 102