Discrete Mathematics Carlos Aguilar Jose De Jesus Melendez

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
(CSC 102) Discrete Structures Lecture 5.
Advertisements

The Logic of Quantified Statements
Discrete Structures Chapter 1 Part B Fundamentals of Logic Nurul Amelina Nasharuddin Multimedia Department 1.
Discrete Mathematics Lecture 2 Alexander Bukharovich New York University.
Discrete Mathematics Math 6A Instructor: M. Welling.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 2 THE LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS THE LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Discrete Structures Chapter 3: The Logic of Quantified Statements
1.2 – Open Sentences and Graphs
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 01/20/11 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.
The Language of Propositional Logic The Syntax and Semantics of PL.
Adapted from Discrete Math
Predicates and Quantifiers
Chapter 2 Section 5 - Slide 1 Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. AND.
Angie Rangel Jose De Jesus Melendez Carlos Aguilar Drake Jain DISCRETE MATHEMATICS MATH 170 PROJECT PART II.
Fall 2002CMSC Discrete Structures1 Let’s get started with... Logic !
2.2 Statements, Connectives, and Quantifiers
Boolean Algebra and Computer Logic Mathematical Structures for Computer Science Chapter 7.1 – 7.2 Copyright © 2006 W.H. Freeman & Co.MSCS Slides Boolean.
Project #9 Scarlitte Ponce Starlite Ponce Cristina Hernandez
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
Chapter 1, Part II With Question/Answer Animations Copyright © McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 3 THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS.
Application: Digital Logic Circuits Lecture 5 Section 1.4 Wed, Jan 24, 2007.
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
Sets and Sentences Open Sentences Foundations of Real Analysis.
Predicates and Quantified Statements
Chapter 2 The Logic of Quantified Statements. Section 2.1 Intro to Predicates & Quantified Statements.
Chapter 2 Logic 2.1 Statements 2.2 The Negation of a Statement 2.3 The Disjunction and Conjunction of Statements 2.4 The Implication 2.5 More on Implications.
Lecture 7 – Jan 28, Chapter 2 The Logic of Quantified Statements.
CS 285- Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4. Section 1.3 Predicate logic Predicate logic is an extension of propositional logic that permits concisely reasoning.
Predicates and Quantifiers Dr. Yasir Ali. 1.Predicates 2.Quantifiers a.Universal Quantifiers b.Existential Quantifiers 3.Negation of Quantifiers 4.Universal.
Symbolic Logic The Following slide were written using materials from the Book: The Following slide were written using materials from the Book: Discrete.
رياضيات متقطعة لعلوم الحاسب MATH 226. Text books: (Discrete Mathematics and its applications) Kenneth H. Rosen, seventh Edition, 2012, McGraw- Hill.
Spring 2003CMSC Discrete Structures1 Let’s get started with... Logic !
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Chapter 3: The Logic of Quantified Statements. Predicate Calculus Instructor: Hayk Melikya 3.1.
Section 1.4. Propositional Functions Propositional functions become propositions (and have truth values) when their variables are each replaced by a value.
Introduction to Predicates and Quantified Statements I Lecture 9 Section 2.1 Wed, Jan 31, 2007.
Simple Logic.
Logic.
Truth Table to Statement Form
3. The Logic of Quantified Statements Summary
Predicates and Quantified Statements I
CSE15 Discrete Mathematics 01/23/17
DISCRETE MATHEMATICS CHAPTER I.
CSNB 143 Discrete Mathematical Structures
Lecture 1 – Formal Logic.
Thinking Mathematically
Truth Tables and Equivalent Statements
Negations of Quantified Statements
CMSC Discrete Structures
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic 2012 Pearson Education, Inc.
The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
CSCI 3310 Mathematical Foundation of Computer Science
Propositional Equivalences
Applications of Propositional Logic
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic © 2008 Pearson Addison-Wesley.
CHAPTER 1: LOGICS AND PROOF
(1.4) An Introduction to Logic
Introduction to Predicates and Quantified Statements I
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic 2012 Pearson Education, Inc.
Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3: Predicate and Quantifier
Discrete Mathematics CMP-200 Propositional Equivalences, Predicates & Quantifiers, Negating Quantified Statements Abdul Hameed
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic © 2008 Pearson Addison-Wesley.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Predicates and Quantifiers
Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4 Logic of Quantified Statements
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Presentation transcript:

Discrete Mathematics Carlos Aguilar Jose De Jesus Melendez Angie Rangel Drake Mackenzie Jain Discrete Mathematics

Sections Section 2.4: Application: Digital Logic Circuits # 34 Predicates and Quantified Statements I # 16, 21 Section 3.2: Predicates and Quantified Statements II #14, 38

Terms/symbols Conjunction (Symbol: ˄) “ p ˄ q ” = p conjunction q (p and q) is a new true statement if both p and q are true statements. Disjunction (Symbol: ˅) “ p ˅ q ” = p disjunction q (p or q) is a new false statement if both p and q are false statements. Conditional Statement (Symbol :→) “ p → q ” = (if p, then q) a new statement that is false when p is a true statement and q is a false statement.

Terms/Symbols Biconditional Statement (Symbol: ↔) “ p ↔ q ” (p if and only if q) = a new true statement if both p and q have same truth values. Negation Statement (Symbol: ~) = “ ~p ” (not p) = a statement in which the new statement is opposite from the original statement.

Section 2.4 Application: Digital Logic Circuits NOR Operator Peirce Arrow ( symbol: ↓ ) NOR-gate is a gate that acts like an OR-gate, which is then followed by a NOT-gate. When both input signals are 0, then the output signal for a NOR-gate is 1. Notation: P ↓ Q (meaning neither P nor Q) ≡ ~ (P ˅ Q)

Show that the following logical equivalences hold for the Peirce arrow ↓, where p↓q ≡~(P˅Q). a. ~P ≡ P ↓ P b. P ˅ Q ≡ (P ↓ Q) ↓ (P ↓ Q) c. P ˄ Q ≡ (P ↓ P) ↓ (Q ↓ Q) d. Write P → Q using Peirce arrows only. e. Write P ↔ Q using Peirce arrows only.

Solutions a. ~P ≡ P ↓ P b. P ˅ Q ≡ (P ↓ Q) ↓ (P ↓ Q) ~P ≡ ~ (P ˅ P) by the idempotent law for ˅ ≡ P ↓ P by definition of ↓ b. P ˅ Q ≡ (P ↓ Q) ↓ (P ↓ Q) ≡ ~(P ↓ Q) ≡ ~(~P ˄ ~Q) by definition of ↓ ≡ P ˅ Q by the double negation law

c. P ˄ Q ≡ (P ↓ P) ↓ (Q ↓ Q) P ˄ Q ≡ ~(~(P ˄ Q)) by the double negation law ≡ ~(~P ˅ ~Q) by De Morgan’s law ≡ ~((P ↓ P) ˅ (Q ↓ Q)) ≡ (P ↓ P) ↓ (Q ↓ Q) by definition of ↓

d. Write P → Q using Peirce arrows only. P → Q ≡ (~P ↓ Q) ↓ (~P ↓ Q) ≡ ~ (~P ↓ Q) ≡ ~ (~ (~P ˅ Q)) by definition of ↓ ≡ ~ (P ˄ ~Q) by the double negation law ≡ ~P ˅ Q by De Morgan’s Law ≡ P → Q

e. Write P ↔ Q using Peirce arrows only. P ↔ Q ≡ (~P ↓ Q) ↓ (P ↓ ~Q) ≡ ~ (~P ˅ Q) ↓ ~ (P ˅ ~Q) by definition of ↓ ≡ (P ˄ ~Q) ↓ (~P ˄ Q) by De Morgan’s Law ≡ ~ ((P ˄ ~Q) ˅ (~P ˄ Q)) by definition of ↓ and De Morgan’s Law ≡ (~P ˅ Q) ˄ (P ˅ ~Q) ≡ P ↔ Q

Universal Quantifiers (Discrete mathematics section 3.1) By: Jose Melendez

Predicates & Quantifiers Charles S. Pierce Before That Predicates & Quantifiers Charles S. Pierce

The man behind the logic Charles Sanders Pierce 1839 – 1914 Sometimes known as “Father of Pragmatism” B.A., B.Sc., M.A. from Harvard University Mathematician, astronomer, chemist, engineer, dramatist, etc. (Brent 2) “[I intend] to make a philosophy like that of Aristotle… and in whatever other department there may be, shall appear as the filling up of its details.” – Charles Pierce

Used to represent predicates Definition of predicates: A sentence that contains a finite number of variables and becomes a statement when specific values are substituted for the variables “x” (Epp 97) The domain of a predicate variable is the set of all values that may be substituted in place of the variable “x” (Epp 97) P(x)  Used to represent predicates

Definition of quantifiers: Words that refer to quantities such as “some” or “all” and tell for how many elements a given predicate is true (Epp 97)     Universal Existential (For all) (There Exists)

Focus: Universal quantifiers “” Stands “for all” Statement written as “ _____ x, x _____”, where the blank between “” and “x” is considered the main point of the sentence; the “x _____” refers to as the domain Domain and main point should be put into singular form

How it is done All soccer balls are round. 1. Main point? 2. Domain? - round 3. Statement? -  soccer ball x, x is round

How it is Done The number 3 is not equal to the square of any real number. 1. Main point? - real number (why: keyword “any” refers to real number) 2. Domain? - 𝑥 2 is not equal to 3 3. Statement? -  real number x, 𝑥 2 is not equal to 3

Examples Rewrite each of the following statements in the form of “ _______ x, _______.” 1. All dinosaurs are extinct.  dinosaur x, x is extinct. 2. Every real number is positive, negative, or zero.  Real number x, x is positive, negative, or zero. 3. No irrational numbers are integers.  irrational number x, x is not an integer 4. No logicians are lazy.  logician x, x is not lazy

More examples 5. The number 2,147,581,953 is not equal to the square of any integer.  integer x, 𝑥 2 is not equal to the square of any integer 6. The number -1 is not equal to the square of any real number.  real number x, 𝑥 2 is not equal to -1

Universal Statement: ( ∀ ) A Universal statement includes the quantifier ( ∀ ) = “all” For Example: ∀x, if x is chocolate, then x tastes good

Universal Example ∀x, if x is tastes good, then x is chocolate. Negation is…. ∃x, such that x tastes bad then x is not chocolate.

Existential Quantifier and Formal Statement : ( ∃ ) A Existential statement includes the quantifier ( ∃ ) = “some” Formal Statement: ∃b a gamer, such that b is boy.

Existential Example ∃b a boy, such that b is gamer. Negation is… ∀b is a boy, if b is a gamer then b is a boy.

Informal Language of Logic: The words such that are inserted just before the predicate. Some other expressions that can be used in place of there exists are there is a, we can find a, there is at least one, for some, and for at least one.

Predicates and Quantified Statements I

c. p is even, for some prime number p. The answer is put as an existential-informal statement, where if it were put in a formal statement if would look like: ∃𝑝 𝑖𝑠 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛, 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑝.  

d. f is not differentiable, for at least one continuous function f. The answer is put as an existential-informal statement, where if it were put in a formal statement it would look like: ∃𝑓 𝑖𝑠 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒, 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑡 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑓𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑡𝑖o𝑛 𝑓.

Predicates and Quantified Statements II In each problem determine whether the proposed negation is correct. If it is not, write a correct negation.

The proposed negation is incorrect, because the negation of “for all” is not “for all and also the negation of an if-then statement is not an if-then statement. The correct negation should be: Negation: There exists a real number x1 and x2, such that x12 ≠ x22 and x1 ≠ x2 .

(∀x) x for all of u,if x is in Discrete Mathematics,then x is lower case. This statement is false because the lower case letter u is usually used to denote elements of a set, therefore this means that the upper case letter u can also be seen with in Discrete Mathematics. In order to make this true the statement should be: Some occurrences of the letter u in Discrete Mathematics are not lowercase. Formal Notation: (∃x) for some of u,such that x is a lowercase letter in Discrete Mathmatics

bibliography Epp, Susanna S. Discrete Mathematics With Applications 4th Edition. Boston, MA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, 2004. Print. Brent, Joseph. Charles Sanders Pierce: A Life. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1998. Print.