If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)

Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

How do I prove this statement is a tautology, without using truth tables?

makoten · 2011-11-02 17:40:30

Only the laws can be used, no truth tables allowed. Prove the statement: ((p V q) ^ (p -> r) ^ (q -> r)) -> r is a tautology. I am genuinely stuck, even though the laws are right in front of me I don't know where to start!

02-11-2011 5:40pm

#1

makoten

Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 138 ✭✭

Join Date: April 2010

Posts: 125

Only the laws can be used, no truth tables allowed.

Prove the statement:
((p V q) ^ (p -> r) ^ (q -> r)) -> r
is a tautology.

I am genuinely stuck, even though the laws are right in front of me I don't know where to start!

0

Comments

#2 02-11-2011 11:43pm

Fremen

Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,481 ✭✭✭

Join Date: May 2006

Posts: 2356

Maybe you should post up what laws you're allowed to use. My strategy would be to eliminate the -> signs by re-writing them as ANDs and ORs. Then use the fact that (p OR not p) is always true.

0