15.12.2012 Views

Why Read This Book? - Index of

Why Read This Book? - Index of

Why Read This Book? - Index of

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

34 Chapter 1 Language and Mathematics<br />

Solution Applying DeMorgan’s laws, we have<br />

1. ¬(p ∧ q ∧ r) ⇔¬p∨¬q∨¬r 2. ¬[(p ∨ q) ∧ (r ∨ s)] ⇔¬(p ∨ q) ∨¬(r ∨ s) ⇔ (¬p ∧¬q) ∨ (¬r ∧¬s) �<br />

Example 1.4.2 Use DeMorgan’s laws to express in words a negation <strong>of</strong> the<br />

following statements.<br />

1. Jacob has brown hair and blue eyes.<br />

2. Either I’m crazy or there is a pink elephant floating overhead.<br />

3. Meghan is at least 25 years old, she has a valid driver’s license, and she<br />

either has her own insurance or has purchased coverage from the car rental<br />

company.<br />

Solution Don’t hesitate to word the statements in a way that makes them easy<br />

to understand.<br />

1. Either Jacob does not have brown hair, or he does not have blue eyes.<br />

2. I am not crazy, and there is no pink elephant floating overhead.<br />

3. Either Meghan is under 25, or she doesn’t have a valid driver’s license, or she<br />

has no insurance <strong>of</strong> her own and has not purchased coverage from the car rental<br />

company. �<br />

EXERCISE 1.4.3 State in words a negation for each <strong>of</strong> the following statements.<br />

(a) Either Melanie is naturally blond, or she bleaches her hair.<br />

(b) Eric has a boarding pass and either a driver’s license or passport.<br />

(c) Either f is not continuous or it crosses the x-axis at some point. (f is a given<br />

function.)<br />

(d) Been there; done that.<br />

1.4.2 Negations <strong>of</strong> If-Then Statements<br />

In Section 1.2, we defined p → q to be logically equivalent to ¬p ∨ q. To construct<br />

a negation <strong>of</strong> p → q, we can use this fact with DeMorgan’s law.<br />

¬(p → q) ⇔¬(¬p ∨ q) ⇔ (¬¬p) ∧¬q ⇔ p ∧¬q<br />

<strong>This</strong> might be a little confusing at first, but later you will want to think <strong>of</strong> it in<br />

the following way. If someone makes a claim that p implies q, then he or she is<br />

claiming that the truth <strong>of</strong> p is by necessity accompanied by the truth <strong>of</strong> q. If you

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!