Advertisement
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

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

Options
  • 02-11-2011 6:40pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 138 ✭✭


    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!


Comments

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


    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.


Advertisement