The Gateway to Computer Science Excellence
+2 votes
484 views

Let $ν(x)$ mean $x$ is a vegetarian, $m(y)$ for $y$ is meat, and $e(x, y)$ for $x$ eats $y$. Based on these, consider the following sentences :

I. $\forall x \vee (x)\Leftrightarrow (\forall y e(x, y) \implies \neg m(y))$

II.$\forall x \vee (x)\Leftrightarrow (\neg(\exists y m(y)\wedge e(x, y)))$

III.$\forall x (\exists y m(y)\wedge e(x, y)) \Leftrightarrow (x)\Leftrightarrow \neg \vee (x)$

One can determine that

  1. Only $I$ and $II$ are equivalent sentences
  2. Only $II$ and $III$ are equivalent sentences.
  3. Only $I$ and $III$ are equivalent sentence .
  4. $I, II,$ and $III$ are equivalent sentences.
in Discrete Mathematics by Boss (30.2k points)
recategorized by | 484 views

1 Answer

+1 vote

I.) If x is vegetarian then all food items he eats must not a meat item
II) If x is vegetarian then there should not at least one mean item that x eats
III) If there exitsts one meat item that x eats then x is not a vegetarian


All these senetences are equivalent

Answer is D

by Boss (32.5k points)
+2

Its not then 

Its if and only if


Moreover, Are there $2$ biimplications in the last sentence ?

Related questions

Quick search syntax
tags tag:apple
author user:martin
title title:apple
content content:apple
exclude -tag:apple
force match +apple
views views:100
score score:10
answers answers:2
is accepted isaccepted:true
is closed isclosed:true
50,645 questions
56,559 answers
195,717 comments
101,589 users