notebook/notes/logic/prop-logic.md

758 lines
28 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters!

This file contains invisible Unicode characters that may be processed differently from what appears below. If your use case is intentional and legitimate, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal hidden characters.

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters that may be confused with others in your current locale. If your use case is intentional and legitimate, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to highlight these characters.

---
title: Propositional Logic
TARGET DECK: Obsidian::STEM
FILE TAGS: logic::propositional
tags:
- logic
- propositional
---
## Overview
A branch of logic derived from negation ($\neg$), conjunction ($\land$), disjunction ($\lor$), implication ($\Rightarrow$), and biconditionals ($\Leftrightarrow$). A **proposition** is a sentence that can be assigned a truth or false value.
%%ANKI
Cloze
{Propositional} logic is also known as {zeroth}-order logic.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1715897257085-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What are the basic propositional logical operators?
Back: $\neg$, $\land$, $\lor$, $\Rightarrow$, and $\Leftrightarrow$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861291-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is a proposition?
Back: A declarative sentence which is either true or false.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272076-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What two categories do propositions fall within?
Back: Atomic and molecular propositions.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272083-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is an atomic proposition?
Back: One that cannot be broken up into smaller propositions.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272087-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is a molecular proposition?
Back: One that can be broken up into smaller propositions.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272091-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Cloze
A {molecular} proposition can be broken up into {atomic} propositions.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272095-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What distinguishes a sentence from a proposition?
Back: The latter has an associated truth value.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272099-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What are constant propositions?
Back: Propositions that contain only constants as operands.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707422675517-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How does Lean define propositional equality?
Back: Expressions `a` and `b` are propositionally equal iff `a = b` is true.
Reference: Avigad, Jeremy. Theorem Proving in Lean, n.d.
Tags: lean
<!--ID: 1706994861298-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How does Lean define `propext`?
Back:
```lean
axiom propext {a b : Prop} : (a ↔ b) → (a = b)
```
Reference: Avigad, Jeremy. Theorem Proving in Lean, n.d.
Tags: lean
<!--ID: 1706994861300-->
END%%
## Implication
Implication is denoted as $\Rightarrow$. It has truth table $$\begin{array}{c|c|c} p & q & p \Rightarrow q \\ \hline T & T & T \\ T & F & F \\ F & T & T \\ F & F & T \end{array}$$
Implication has a few "equivalent" English expressions that are commonly used.
Given propositions $P$ and $Q$, we have the following equivalences:
* $P$ if $Q$
* $P$ only if $Q$
* $P$ is necessary for $Q$
* $P$ is sufficient for $Q$
%%ANKI
Basic
What name is given to operand $a$ in $a \Rightarrow b$?
Back: The antecedent
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861308-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What name is given to operand $b$ in $a \Rightarrow b$?
Back: The consequent
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861310-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ if $Q$" in propositional logic?
Back: $Q \Rightarrow P$
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272127-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ if $Q$" using "necessary"?
Back: $P$ is necessary for $Q$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966420-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ if $Q$" using "sufficient"?
Back: $Q$ is sufficient for $P$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966425-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ only if $Q$" in propositional logic?
Back: $P \Rightarrow Q$
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272134-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ only if $Q$" using "necessary"?
Back: $Q$ is necessary for $P$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966429-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ only if $Q$" using "sufficient"?
Back: $P$ is sufficient for $Q$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966432-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ is necessary for $Q$" in propositional logic?
Back: $Q \Rightarrow P$
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272140-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ is necessary for $Q$" using "if"?
Back: $P$ if $Q$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966435-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ is necessary for $Q$" using "only if"?
Back: $Q$ only if $P$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966438-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ is sufficient for $Q$" in propositional logic?
Back: $P \Rightarrow Q$
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272145-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ is sufficient for $Q$" using "if"?
Back: $Q$ if $P$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966441-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ is sufficient for $Q$" using "only if"?
Back: $P$ only if $Q$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966444-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ if $Q$" using "only if"?
Back: $Q$ only if $P$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966449-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ is sufficient for $Q$" using "necessary"?
Back: $Q$ is necessary for $P$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966454-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ only if $Q$" using "if"?
Back: $Q$ if $P$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966458-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How do you write "$P$ is necessary for $Q$" using "sufficient"?
Back: $Q$ is sufficient for $P$.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1717853966462-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Which logical operator maps to "if and only if"?
Back: $\Leftrightarrow$
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272163-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Which logical operator maps to "necessary and sufficient"?
Back: $\Leftrightarrow$
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272168-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is the converse of $P \Rightarrow Q$?
Back: $Q \Rightarrow P$
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272173-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
When is implication equivalent to its converse?
Back: It's indeterminate.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272178-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is the contrapositive of $P \Rightarrow Q$?
Back: $\neg Q \Rightarrow \neg P$
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272184-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
When is implication equivalent to its contrapositive?
Back: They are always equivalent.
Reference: Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
<!--ID: 1708199272189-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Given propositions $p$ and $q$, $p \Leftrightarrow q$ is equivalent to the conjunction of what two expressions?
Back: $p \Rightarrow q$ and $q \Rightarrow p$.
Reference: Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1715969047070-->
END%%
## Laws
### Commutativity
For propositions $E1$ and $E2$:
* $(E1 \land E2) = (E2 \land E1)$
* $(E1 \lor E2) = (E2 \lor E1)$
* $(E1 = E2) = (E2 = E1)$
%%ANKI
Basic
Which of the basic logical operators do the commutative laws apply to?
Back: $\land$, $\lor$, and $=$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673350-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What do the commutative laws allow us to do?
Back: Reorder operands.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673351-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is the commutative law of e.g. $\land$?
Back: $E1 \land E2 = E2 \land E1$
<!--ID: 1707251673353-->
END%%
### Associativity
For propositions $E1$, $E2$, and $E3$:
* $E1 \land (E2 \land E3) = (E1 \land E2) \land E3$
* $E1 \lor (E2 \lor E3) = (E1 \lor E2) \lor E3$
%%ANKI
Basic
Which of the basic logical operators do the associative laws apply to?
Back: $\land$ and $\lor$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673354-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What do the associative laws allow us to do?
Back: Remove parentheses.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673355-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is the associative law of e.g. $\land$?
Back: $E1 \land (E2 \land E3) = (E1 \land E2) \land E3$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673357-->
END%%
### Distributivity
For propositions $E1$, $E2$, and $E3$:
* $E1 \lor (E2 \land E3) = (E1 \lor E2) \land (E1 \lor E3)$
* $E1 \land (E2 \lor E3) = (E1 \land E2) \lor (E1 \land E3)$
%%ANKI
Basic
Which of the basic logical operators do the distributive laws apply to?
Back: $\land$ and $\lor$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673358-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What do the distributive laws allow us to do?
Back: "Factor" propositions.
Reference: Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673360-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is the distributive law of e.g. $\land$ over $\lor$?
Back: $E1 \land (E2 \lor E3) = (E1 \land E2) \lor (E1 \land E3)$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673361-->
END%%
### De Morgan's
For propositions $E1$ and $E2$:
* $\neg (E1 \land E2) = \neg E1 \lor \neg E2$
* $\neg (E1 \lor E2) = \neg E1 \land \neg E2$
%%ANKI
Basic
Which of the basic logical operators do De Morgan's laws involve?
Back: $\neg$, $\land$, and $\lor$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673363-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How is De Morgan's law (distributing $\land$) expressed as an equivalence?
Back: $\neg (E1 \land E2) = \neg E1 \lor \neg E2$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
Tags: programming::equiv-trans
<!--ID: 1707251673364-->
END%%
### Law of Negation
For any proposition $E1$, it follows that $\neg (\neg E1) = E1$.
%%ANKI
Basic
How is the law of negation expressed as an equivalence?
Back: $\neg (\neg E1) = E1$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
Tags: programming::equiv-trans
<!--ID: 1707251673365-->
END%%
### Law of Excluded Middle
For any proposition $E1$, it follows that $E1 \lor \neg E1 = T$.
%%ANKI
Basic
Which of the basic logical operators does the law of excluded middle involve?
Back: $\lor$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673367-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How is the law of excluded middle expressed as an equivalence?
Back: $E1 \lor \neg E1 = T$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
Tags: programming::equiv-trans
<!--ID: 1707251673368-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Which equivalence schema is "refuted" by sentence, "This sentence is false."
Back: The law of excluded middle
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251779153-->
END%%
### Law of Contradiction
For any proposition $E1$, it follows that $E1 \land \neg E1 = F$.
%%ANKI
Basic
Which of the basic logical operators does the law of contradiction involve?
Back: $\land$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673370-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How is the law of contradiction expressed as an equivalence?
Back: $E1 \land \neg E1 = F$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
Tags: programming::equiv-trans
<!--ID: 1707251673371-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Cloze
The law of {1:excluded middle} is to {2:$\lor$} whereas the law of {2:contradiction} is to {1:$\land$}.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1707251673373-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What does the principle of explosion state?
Back: That any statement can be proven from a contradiction.
Reference: “Principle of Explosion,” in _Wikipedia_, July 3, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion&oldid=1232334233).
<!--ID: 1721354092779-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How is the principle of explosion stated in first-order logic?
Back: $\forall P, F \Rightarrow P$
Reference: “Principle of Explosion,” in _Wikipedia_, July 3, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion&oldid=1232334233).
<!--ID: 1721354092783-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What does the law of contradiction say?
Back: For any proposition $P$, it holds that $\neg (P \land \neg P)$.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1721354092786-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
How does the principle of explosion relate to the law of contradiction?
Back: If a contradiction could be proven, then anything can be proven.
Reference: “Principle of Explosion,” in _Wikipedia_, July 3, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion&oldid=1232334233).
<!--ID: 1721354092789-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Suppose $P$ and $\neg P$. Show schematically how to use the principle of explosion to prove $Q$.
Back: $$\begin{align*} P \\ \neg P \\ P \lor Q \\ \hline Q \end{align*}$$Reference: “Principle of Explosion,” in _Wikipedia_, July 3, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion&oldid=1232334233).
<!--ID: 1721354092792-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Cloze
The law of {contradiction} and law of {excluded middle} create a dichotomy in "logical space".
Reference: “Law of Noncontradiction,” in _Wikipedia_, June 14, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction&oldid=1229006759).
<!--ID: 1721354092795-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Which property of partitions is analagous to the law of contradiction on "logical space"?
Back: Disjointedness.
Reference: “Law of Noncontradiction,” in _Wikipedia_, June 14, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction&oldid=1229006759).
<!--ID: 1721354092798-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Which property of partitions is analagous to the law of excluded middle on "logical space"?
Back: Exhaustiveness.
Reference: “Law of Noncontradiction,” in _Wikipedia_, June 14, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction&oldid=1229006759).
<!--ID: 1721354092801-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Cloze
The law of {1:contradiction} is to "{2:mutually exclusive}" whereas the law of {2:excluded middle} is "{1:jointly exhaustive}".
Reference: “Law of Noncontradiction,” in _Wikipedia_, June 14, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction&oldid=1229006759).
<!--ID: 1721354092805-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Which logical law proves equivalence of the law of contradiction and excluded middle?
Back: De Morgan's law.
Reference: “Law of Noncontradiction,” in _Wikipedia_, June 14, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction&oldid=1229006759).
<!--ID: 1721355020261-->
END%%
## As Sets
A **state** is a function that maps identifiers to $T$ or $F$. A proposition can be equivalently seen as a representation of the set of states in which it is true.
%%ANKI
Basic
What is a state?
Back: A function mapping identifiers to values.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861314-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Is $(b \land c)$ well-defined in $\{\langle b, T \rangle, \langle c, F \rangle\}$?
Back: Yes.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861318-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Is $(b \lor d)$ well-defined in $\{\langle b, T \rangle, \langle c, F \rangle\}$?
Back: No.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861320-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
A proposition is well-defined with respect to what?
Back: A state to evaluate against.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861316-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What proposition represents states $\{(b, T), (c, T)\}$ and $\{(b, F), (c, F)\}$?
Back: $(b \land c) \lor (\neg b \land \neg c)$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861337-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What set of states does proposition $a \land b$ represent?
Back: $\{\{\langle a, T \rangle, \langle b, T \rangle\}\}$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861339-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What set of states does proposition $a \lor b$ represent?
Back: $\{\{\langle a, T \rangle, \langle b, T \rangle\}, \{\langle a, T \rangle, \langle b, F \rangle\}, \{\langle a, F \rangle, \langle b, T \rangle\}\}$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1715895996324-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is sloppy about phrase "the states in $b \lor \neg c$"?
Back: $b \lor \neg c$ is not a set but a representation of a set (of states).
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861341-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is the weakest proposition?
Back: $T$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861348-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What set of states does $T$ represent?
Back: The set of all states.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861350-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What is the strongest proposition?
Back: $F$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861352-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What set of states does $F$ represent?
Back: The set of no states.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861354-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
What does a proposition *represent*?
Back: The set of states in which it is true.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861335-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
When is $p$ stronger than $q$?
Back: When $p \Rightarrow q$.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861343-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
If $p \Rightarrow q$, which of $p$ or $q$ is considered stronger?
Back: $p$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1715631869202-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
When is $p$ weaker than $q$?
Back: When $q \Rightarrow p$.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861346-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
If $p \Rightarrow q$, which of $p$ or $q$ is considered weaker?
Back: $q$
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1715631869207-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Why is $b \land c$ stronger than $b \lor c$?
Back: The former represents a subset of the states the latter represents.
Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1706994861356-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Basic
Given sets $a$ and $b$, $a = b$ is equivalent to the conjunction of what two expressions?
Back: $a \subseteq b$ and $b \subseteq a$.
Reference: Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1715969047071-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Cloze
{$a \Rightarrow b$} is to propositional logic as {$a \subseteq b$} is to sets.
Reference: Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1715969047073-->
END%%
%%ANKI
Cloze
{$a \Leftrightarrow b$} is to propositional logic as {$a = b$} is to sets.
Reference: Reference: Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
<!--ID: 1715969047074-->
END%%
## Bibliography
* Gries, David. *The Science of Programming*. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
* “Law of Noncontradiction,” in _Wikipedia_, June 14, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Law_of_noncontradiction&oldid=1229006759).
* * Oscar Levin, *Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction*, 3rd ed., n.d., [https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf](https://discrete.openmathbooks.org/pdfs/dmoi3-tablet.pdf).
* “Principle of Explosion,” in _Wikipedia_, July 3, 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Principle_of_explosion&oldid=1232334233).