Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In logic and mathematics, statements and are said to be logically equivalent if they have the same truth value in every model. [1] The logical equivalence of p {\displaystyle p} and q {\displaystyle q} is sometimes expressed as p ≡ q {\displaystyle p\equiv q} , p :: q {\displaystyle p::q} , E p q {\displaystyle {\textsf {E}}pq} , or p q ...
Thus, the statement "If I am a triangle, then I am a three-sided polygon" is logically equivalent to "If I am a three-sided polygon, then I am a triangle," because the definition of "triangle" is "three-sided polygon". A truth table makes it clear that S and the converse of S are not logically equivalent, unless both terms imply each other:
The corresponding logical symbols are "", "", [6] and , [10] and sometimes "iff".These are usually treated as equivalent. However, some texts of mathematical logic (particularly those on first-order logic, rather than propositional logic) make a distinction between these, in which the first, ↔, is used as a symbol in logic formulas, while ⇔ is used in reasoning about those logic formulas ...
In logic, a set of symbols is commonly used to express logical representation. The following table lists many common symbols, together with their name, how they should be read out loud, and the related field of mathematics.
Logical equality is an operation on two logical values, typically the values of two propositions, that produces a value of true if and only if both operands are false or both operands are true. The truth table of p EQ q (also written as p = q , p ↔ q , Epq , p ≡ q , or p == q ) is as follows:
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).
Any equivalence relation is the negation of an apartness relation, though the converse statement only holds in classical mathematics (as opposed to constructive mathematics), since it is equivalent to the law of excluded middle. Each relation that is both reflexive and left (or right) Euclidean is also an equivalence relation.
The inverse and the converse of a conditional are logically equivalent to each other, just as the conditional and its contrapositive are logically equivalent to each other. [1] But the inverse of a conditional cannot be inferred from the conditional itself (e.g., the conditional might be true while its inverse might be false [2]). For example ...