Question

Prove that ∀x(P(x)∨Q(x)) and ∀xP(x)∨ ∀xQ(x) are not logically equivalent

Prove that ∀x(P(x)∨Q(x)) and ∀xP(x)∨ ∀xQ(x) are not logically equivalent

Homework Answers

Answer #1

Solution:

I will prove that given statements are not logically equivalent using the following example:

Domain: set of all positive numbers

P(x) = "x is an even number"

Q(x) = "x is odd number"

So, x (P(x) v Q(x)) that is (every number is either even or odd) is true.

But, x P(x) v Q(x) that is (every number is even or every number is odd) is false.

Thus, we can say that  x (P(x) v Q(x)) and x P(x) v Q(x) are not logically equivalent.

Please give thumbsup, if you like it. Thanks.

Know the answer?
Your Answer:

Post as a guest

Your Name:

What's your source?

Earn Coins

Coins can be redeemed for fabulous gifts.

Not the answer you're looking for?
Ask your own homework help question
Similar Questions
Show the following are not logically equivalent: ∀xP (x) ∨ ∀xQ(x) and ∀x(P (x) ∨ Q(x)).
Show the following are not logically equivalent: ∀xP (x) ∨ ∀xQ(x) and ∀x(P (x) ∨ Q(x)).
Show that ∀xP (x) ∨ ∀xQ(x) ̸≡ ∀x [P (x) ∨ Q(x)] By defining a universe...
Show that ∀xP (x) ∨ ∀xQ(x) ̸≡ ∀x [P (x) ∨ Q(x)] By defining a universe of discourse and predicts P, Q over it such that one side of the expression evaluates to true and the other side evaluates to false.
Discrete mathematics counterexamples - Supplementary question: S1.) Give a counterexample to show that "∀x(p(x) --> Q(x))...
Discrete mathematics counterexamples - Supplementary question: S1.) Give a counterexample to show that "∀x(p(x) --> Q(x)) and ∀xP(x) --> ∀xQ(x)" may not be logically equivalent.
If X does not occur free in Q, then ∀X(P(X) -> Q) is semantically equivalent with∃XP(X)...
If X does not occur free in Q, then ∀X(P(X) -> Q) is semantically equivalent with∃XP(X) -> Q. Give an example to show that these formulas will not necessarily be equivalent if X does occur free in Q.
Prove or disprove that [(p → q) ∧ (p → r)] and [p→ (q ∧ r)]...
Prove or disprove that [(p → q) ∧ (p → r)] and [p→ (q ∧ r)] are logically equivalent.
Are the statement forms P∨((Q∧R)∨ S) and ¬((¬ P)∧(¬(Q∧ R)∧ (¬ S))) logically equivalent? I found...
Are the statement forms P∨((Q∧R)∨ S) and ¬((¬ P)∧(¬(Q∧ R)∧ (¬ S))) logically equivalent? I found that they were not logically equivalent but wanted to check. Also, does the negation outside the parenthesis on the second statement form cancel out with the negation in front of P and in front of (Q∧ R)∧ (¬ S)) ?
are they logically equivalent (show how) truth table or in word:: a) p —> ( q...
are they logically equivalent (show how) truth table or in word:: a) p —> ( q —> r ) and ( p -> q) —> r b) p^ (q v r ) and ( p ^ q) v ( p ^ r )
(1) Determine whether the propositions p → (q ∨ ¬r) and (p ∧ ¬q) → ¬r...
(1) Determine whether the propositions p → (q ∨ ¬r) and (p ∧ ¬q) → ¬r are logically equivalent using either a truth table or laws of logic. (2) Let A, B and C be sets. If a is the proposition “x ∈ A”, b is the proposition “x ∈ B” and c is the proposition “x ∈ C”, write down a proposition involving a, b and c that is logically equivalentto“x∈A∪(B−C)”. (3) Consider the statement ∀x∃y¬P(x,y). Write down a...
Prove equivalent: P⊃ (Q ⊃ P) and (~Q ⊃ (P ⊃ (~Q V P)))
Prove equivalent: P⊃ (Q ⊃ P) and (~Q ⊃ (P ⊃ (~Q V P)))
1) Show that ¬p → (q → r) and q → (p ∨ r) are logically...
1) Show that ¬p → (q → r) and q → (p ∨ r) are logically equivalent. No truth table and please state what law you're using. Also, please write neat and clear. Thanks 2) .Show that (p ∨ q) ∧ (¬p ∨ r) → (q ∨ r) is a tautology. No truth table and please state what law you're using. Also, please write neat and clear.
ADVERTISEMENT
Need Online Homework Help?

Get Answers For Free
Most questions answered within 1 hours.

Ask a Question
ADVERTISEMENT