CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Nested Quantifiers Section 1.4.
Advertisements

Extensible Networking Platform CSE 240 – Logic and Discrete Mathematics Review: Mathematical Induction Use induction to prove that the sum of the.
PARADOX Chi-Kwong Li. A ‘ VISUAL ’ PARADOX : I LLUSION.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA CSE 20 Discrete math Prof. Shachar Lovett
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Basic Structures: Sets, Functions, Sequences, Sums, and Matrices
CS 173: Discrete Mathematical Structures Cinda Heeren Rm 2213 Siebel Center Office Hours: M 12:30-2:30p.
© by Kenneth H. Rosen, Discrete Mathematics & its Applications, Sixth Edition, Mc Graw-Hill, 2007 Chapter 1: (Part 2): The Foundations: Logic and Proofs.
(CSC 102) Discrete Structures Lecture 14.
Theory of Computation 1 Theory of Computation Peer Instruction Lecture Slides by Dr. Cynthia Lee, UCSD are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike.
Russel‘s paradox (also known as Russel‘s antimony)
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
22C:19 Discrete Structures Logic and Proof Spring 2014 Sukumar Ghosh.
Discrete Structures Chapter 1 Part B Fundamentals of Logic Nurul Amelina Nasharuddin Multimedia Department 1.
Discrete Mathematics Math 6A Instructor: M. Welling.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 01/20/11 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
Adapted from Discrete Math
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
Predicates and Quantifiers
CS 2210 (22C:019) Discrete Structures Logic and Proof Spring 2015 Sukumar Ghosh.
Methods of Proof & Proof Strategies
CSCI 115 Chapter 2 Logic. CSCI 115 §2.1 Propositions and Logical Operations.
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA.
Russell’s Paradox Lecture 24 Section 5.4 Fri, Mar 10, 2006.
CSE 311: Foundations of Computing Fall 2013 Lecture 8: More Proofs.
Section 1.8. Section Summary Proof by Cases Existence Proofs Constructive Nonconstructive Disproof by Counterexample Nonexistence Proofs Uniqueness Proofs.
CSE 20: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science Prof. Shachar Lovett.
1 Sections 1.5 & 3.1 Methods of Proof / Proof Strategy.
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
CS 2210 (22C:019) Discrete Structures Introduction and Scope: Propositions Spring 2015 Sukumar Ghosh.
CSE 20: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science Prof. Shachar Lovett.
CSE 20: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science Prof. Shachar Lovett.
CSE 20 – Discrete Mathematics Dr. Cynthia Bailey Lee Dr. Shachar Lovett Peer Instruction in Discrete Mathematics by Cynthia Leeis licensed under a Creative.
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
Chapter 2 The Logic of Quantified Statements. Section 2.1 Intro to Predicates & Quantified Statements.
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Lecture 9 Proofs and Set Theory Autumn 2012 CSE
CSE 20: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science Prof. Shachar Lovett.
CSE 20: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science Prof. Shachar Lovett.
Based on slides by Patrice Belleville and Steve Wolfman CPSC 121: Models of Computation Unit 11: Sets.
22C:19 Discrete Structures Logic and Proof Fall 2014 Sukumar Ghosh.
Based on slides by Patrice Belleville and Steve Wolfman CPSC 121: Models of Computation Unit 11: Sets.
CSE 311: Foundations of Computing Fall 2013 Lecture 8: Proofs and Set theory.
 Founded in 1884 by Gottlob Frege and Richard Dedekind  Math can be reduced to 9 simple logical axioms  2 axioms are not logical  Axiom of infinity.
Section 1.5 and 1.6 Predicates and Quantifiers. Vocabulary Predicate Domain Universal Quantifier Existential Quantifier Counterexample Free variable Bound.
Direct Proof and Counterexample I Lecture 11 Section 3.1 Fri, Jan 28, 2005.
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Lecture 8 Proofs Autumn 2012 CSE
CSE 20 – Discrete Mathematics Dr. Cynthia Bailey Lee Dr. Shachar Lovett Peer Instruction in Discrete Mathematics by Cynthia Leeis licensed under a Creative.
CSE 20: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science Prof. Shachar Lovett.
Chapter 1 Logic and Proof.
11.7 – Proof by Mathematical Induction
CS 2210:0001 Discrete Structures Logic and Proof
CSE15 Discrete Mathematics 01/23/17
CSE 105 Theory of Computation
Chapter 1: The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
CSE 20: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science Prof. Shachar Lovett
Direct Proof and Counterexample I
Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4 Logic of Quantified Statements
Presentation transcript:

CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Prof. Shachar Lovett Clicker frequency: CA

Todays topics Boolean logic: quantifiers Paradoxes Sections in Jenkyns, Stephenson

Quantifiers Universal:  Existential:  Example:  x,y  z, x-y=z The universe where inputs live is important Our example is: True if x,y,z are integers False if x,y,z are positive integers

Some examples

We’re going to focus on: “Nested” quantifiers/more than one quantifier General strategy for proving (or disproving) quantified statements

ssss A. D. None/more/other B.C. Which picture represents the predicate? (Predicate Love(x,y) means “x loves y”, denoted by arrow from x to y)

A. D. None/more/other B.C.  Which picture represents the predicate? (Predicate Love(x,y) means “x loves y”, denoted by arrow from x to y)

Proof strategies overview (more coming later) For a universally quantified (“for all”) statement: To prove it: direct proof, generalization from the generic particular (construction), mathematical induction To disprove it: Provide a single counterexample For an existentially quantified (“there exists”) statement: To prove it: Provide a single example To disprove it: State the correct version as a universally quantified statement (“For all x, not P(x)”) then prove it using above methods

What is the correct negation of the predicate? (Predicate Love(x,y) means “x loves y”)

What is the correct negation of the predicate? (Predicate Love(x,y) means “x loves y”)

Black swans “All swans are white” I lived 100 years. All the swans I saw in my lifetime are white. Is this enough for the predicate to be true? A. Yes B. No

Black swans “All swans are white” I lived 101 years. I saw one black swan in all this time. Is this enough for the predicate to be false? A. Yes B. No

Paradoxes Lets have some fun with paradoxes They actually have deep mathematical meaning They came up when mathematicians and philosophers tried to understand some “corner cases” in math and logic

Is this sentence true? “This sentence is true” A. True B. False

Is this sentence true? “This sentence is false” A. True B. False

Liar’s Paradox “This sentence is false” This has been perplexing people since at least the Greeks in 4 th century BCE (2300 years!) What are some key features of this that make it a paradox?

Grandparent Paradox (Time Travel Paradox) You travel back in time and prevent one pair of your biological grandparents from ever meeting each other (assume this prevents your birth). Now who will go back in time to prevent your grandparents from meeting? Pop culture version:

Pinocchio’s Paradox

The Barber A certain town has only one barber (a man). Every man in the town is clean-shaven. For each man m in the town, the barber shaves m if and only if m does not shave himself. Question: Does the barber shave himself? a) YES b) NO c) Not enough information d) Other

List Organization Question (aka Russell’s paradox) Suppose you have many lists and some of your lists are lists of lists (to help you organize your lists), and some lists even include themselves. You make a list of all lists that do not include themselves, called NON-DANGER-LIST. Question: Should NON-DANGER-LIST include itself? a) YES b) NO c) Not enough information d) Other

Next class Simplification rules Implications and common mistakes using them Read sections in Jenkyns, Stephenson