Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The assertion that Q is necessary for P is colloquially equivalent to "P cannot be true unless Q is true" or "if Q is false, then P is false". [9] [1] By contraposition, this is the same thing as "whenever P is true, so is Q". The logical relation between P and Q is expressed as "if P, then Q" and denoted "P ⇒ Q" (P implies Q).
definition: is defined as metalanguage:= means "from now on, is defined to be another name for ." This is a statement in the metalanguage, not the object language. The notation may occasionally be seen in physics, meaning the same as :=.
In ordinary language terms, if both p and q are true, then the conjunction p ∧ q is true. For all other assignments of logical values to p and to q the conjunction p ∧ q is false. It can also be said that if p, then p ∧ q is q, otherwise p ∧ q is p.
The rule states that P implies Q is logically equivalent to not-or and that either form can replace the other in logical proofs. In other words, if P {\displaystyle P} is true, then Q {\displaystyle Q} must also be true, while if Q {\displaystyle Q} is not true, then P {\displaystyle P} cannot be true either; additionally, when P {\displaystyle ...
Some of these connectives may be defined in terms of others: for instance, implication, p → q, may be defined in terms of disjunction and negation, as ¬p ∨ q; [71] and disjunction may be defined in terms of negation and conjunction, as ¬(¬p ∧ ¬q). [48]
In writing, phrases commonly used as alternatives to P "if and only if" Q include: Q is necessary and sufficient for P, for P it is necessary and sufficient that Q, P is equivalent (or materially equivalent) to Q (compare with material implication), P precisely if Q, P precisely (or exactly) when Q, P exactly in case Q, and P just in case Q. [3]
Logical biconditional becomes the equality binary relation, and negation becomes a bijection which permutes true and false. Conjunction and disjunction are dual with respect to negation, which is expressed by De Morgan's laws: ¬(p ∧ q) ⇔ ¬ p ∨ ¬ q ¬(p ∨ q) ⇔ ¬ p ∧ ¬ q. Propositional variables become variables in the Boolean ...
The simplest case occurs when an OR formula becomes one its own inputs e.g. p = q. Begin with (p ∨ s) = q, then let p = q. Observe that q's "definition" depends on itself "q" as well as on "s" and the OR connective; this definition of q is thus impredicative. Either of two conditions can result: [24] oscillation or memory.