[–] antiracist ago (edited ago)
Not concerned with our other discussion at the moment. Pretty sure I did bad on my exam.
(Y ^ B) -> H)) =1
Y = 1
~B = 1
H = 0
So then it's (1 ^ 0) - > 0)) so 1 and 0 equals 1
False.
[–] eagleshigh [S] ago
on s-rules now and i don't fully understand the previous material yet
[–] eagleshigh [S] ago
I don't even care about our other discussion I'm pissed because my fucking notes from last week didn't save for some reason.
I'll get back to you in a bit.
[–] Tat_Tvam_Asi ago
Did you misspell are? No? What am I not getting here?
[–] eagleshigh [S] ago
AR=antiracist
[–] JesusOfNazareth60 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
Why don't you answer me regarding if you're in class or not?
[–] eagleshigh [S] ago
If Newton’s gravitational theory is correct and there’s no undiscovered planet near Uranus, then the orbit of Uranus would be such-and-such. Newton’s gravitational theory is correct. The orbit of Uranus isn’t such-and-such. Á There’s an undiscovered planet near Uranus. [This reasoning led to the discovery of the planet Neptune.
Kewl
[–] JesusOfNazareth61 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago
looooooooooooooooool u can pruve da existens ov sumfin wiffout haffin a picshur ov it????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? teehee @crensch @bilbo_swaggins @stretched_girl @cancel-cat-facts @bojangles
[–] eagleshigh [S] ago (edited ago)
Care to help me with sentences and translating them into PL Also with finding truth values again.
[–] JesusOfNazareth61 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
What have you got so far?
[–] eagleshigh [S] ago
I'm not; I'm studying.
[–] JesusOfNazareth60 ago (edited ago)
The book you sent me or the reddit lectures or something I sent you?
[–] eagleshigh [S] 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago (edited ago)
So, for instance with bi-conditionals. Let's use = as the triple bar. The = means 'if and only if', correct me if I'm wrong.
So let's say we have (A = B) which translates to English as "Ann is home if and only if Bob is". That right?
So for instance, (~A = ~B) would come to "Ann isn't home if and only if Bob isn't home".
Also, a bi-conditional is true only if both both sides are true or both sides are false. Otherwise, for instance a true and false is false.
That right?
[–] JesusOfNazareth60 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
All of that is right.
= is equals.
Use <-> for biconditional. Iff. If and only if.
The arrows go both ways. P <-> Q is P -> Q and Q -> P.
[–] eagleshigh [S] ago
A=1 and B=0
(A <-> B) would be (1 <-> 0). I got that part down but I forget how to break it down to the actual truth value.,
[–] eagleshigh [S] ago
how are my notes
Put every premise on a numbered line. 1. (A vB) assume the premise is true. 2. When we get to conclusion, indent and write asm (assumption), assume the opposite of the conclusion. ~(~A > B) 3. ~A 2 nif 4. ~B 2 nif when you apply s-rule, cross it out. 5. B 1,3 ds (disjunctive syllogism) to lines one and 3 6. Once you get a contradiction you unindent and write the opposite of the assumption, which it turns out was the conclusion of the argument. If this had worked, we wouldn’t have gotten a contradiction. No counter example, this argument is valid. 2-5 raa
Nif, write left hand side, don’t change anything and write the opposite of other side. When you apply s rule to one prop, it gives two pieces of information. Only thing left, if you have a conditional you can write the left side exactly as is. Conjunction, write the right, opposite of right write the left. Opposite of left, therefore we can write the left hand side which is b. s rules applied to one prop and you get two. I rules you apply I rule to 2 props and you get 1.
Raa stands for redcutio ad absurdum. Lets say we want to prove A. there are all kinds of strategies for proving. We use 1, because it will work every time, the reduction strategy. If we want to prove a, the reduction strategy says asm: ~A. If in assuming ~A, we get a contradiction, then that means that ~A is false. If ~A is def false, A is true. Raa is a strategy by which you assume the opposite of what you want to prove. Show that the opposite of what you want to prove is false, therefore showing it’s true.
~(~A ^ ~B) Therefore (A v B) one premise: 1. ~(~A ^ ~B) 2. Then we indent, indicate an assumption. Write the opposite. 2. Asm: ~(A v B) try to find a way to use an s rule. Negated or, write opposite of left side and right side. 3. ~A 2 nor 4. ~B 2 nor Cross out line 2. Nothing we can do to simplify lines 3 and 4 further. We do have rule for ~ and. Conjunctive syllogism. 2 diff versions. Phi is left and Sai is right. Negated and, match to left you can write the op of the right. Match of the left write op of right. 5. B 1,3 cs no counter example. Our assumption is false, its op is true. 6 (A v B) 2-5 raa left number is line where assumption is made, the right number is where you got the contradiction. Unindent after contradiction. Right hand number is last number of the indent. All of this got us line 6.
[–] [deleted] ago
[–] Crensch-no-education ago (edited ago)
LEAVE @EAGLESHIGH ALONE!
@bojangles
You know who doesn't know any of this stuff? Idiot @Crensch. Also, neither does idiot @bilbo_swaggins
@bojangles @SarMegahhikkitha
But who needs to know LOGIC when Crensch can pull his worldview out of his ass, or suck it from Krauss's penis?
[–] Antiracist10 ago
Why should I help you when you're such a dick to me?