search
Log In
1 vote
1.2k views
The proposition {[p → (q ∨ r)] ∧ (~q)} → (p → r) is
in Mathematical Logic
retagged by
1.2k views
0
the answer given is  Tautology, but m' unable to proove?

2 Answers

4 votes
 
Best answer

[p → (q ∨ r)] ∧ (~q)} → (p → r)
= ((p' + q + r)q')' + p' + r
= (p'q' + rq')' + p' + r
= (p + q)(r' + q) + p' + r
= pr' + pq + qr' + q + p' + r
=pr' + (pq + qr' +q) + p' + r = (pr' + p') + q(p + r' +1) + r
= p' +r' + q + r
=p' + q + (r + r')
= p' +
 q + T
= TAUTOLOGY

 


selected by
0
4th '=' from top   ---- in middle it shud be q instead of qq'
4 votes
implication is false when lhs is true and rhs is false

so rhs p->r is false if p is true and r is false (we assume RHS is false)

coming to lhs it is conjunction of two terms

-q is true  that means q is false

p->(q or r)    p is true q and r are false  so T->F is false

so lhs is false and false that gives false

F->F is true

so it is tautology(bcoz if rhs is false lhs is also false )
2
Good method. You have gone inside the formula- so all GATE questions on this topic will be very easy :)
0
by considering this, how can we say its true for all combinations of p q r boolean values, thus forming tautology, thus a single case enough?
1
In case of Implication(=>), When LHS is true and RHS is false is the only case that the overall result becomes false. That's why he has checked for that case only. In all the other cases its undoubtedly a Tautology.
0
thanks

Related questions

0 votes
0 answers
1
232 views
I tried solving this question using normal approach of writing the whole truth table and evaluating each proposition. This seems to be a very error-prone method. It took over 15-20 minutes. Is there any other method of solving this kind of questions?
asked Oct 16, 2017 in Mathematical Logic rahul saxena 232 views
0 votes
0 answers
2
0 votes
0 answers
3
78 views
Which of the following statements is TRUE about the propositional logic formula $S:\{(p→q)∧(¬q∨r)∧(r→s)\}→¬(p→s)$ $(A)$ S is a contradiction $(B)$ S is satisfiable but not valid $(C)$ S is valid $(D)$ None of the above
asked Jan 31, 2018 in Mathematical Logic Utsav09 78 views
2 votes
1 answer
4
279 views
Gold and silver ornaments are precious . $G(x): x$ is a gold ornament. $S(x): x$ is a silver ornament. $P(x): x$ is precious. Now why is this statement true? $\forall x \Biggl ( \Bigl (G(x) \lor S(x) \Bigr ) \to P(x) \Biggr )$ ... Although universal quantifier is not distributive over disjunction but in this case the ornament will belong to only 1 category, so is there any with this?
asked Dec 30, 2015 in Mathematical Logic radha gogia 279 views
...