Confirmation of Universal and Existential Quantification
$begingroup$
Im new to the discrete mathematics scene and was wondering if I could confirm some stuff just to make sure i am getting the concepts correctly. All three of these questions deal specifically with quantifiers. so for the questions.
∃ at(King John, Stanford) ∧ smart (king john)
∀ at ( King John, Stanford) ^ smart ( king john)
so if I were to convert these to sentence's would it be:
There exists a person at Stanford named king john who is smart
Everyone named king john at Standford is smart
Im not really sure if these are correct as my book does not give me any way to check my answers & this is the only way to get my practice in.
and one more question for some reason in my readings it says that
∃x At (x, Standford) ⇒ Smart(x)
(would be true if there is anyone who is not at Stanford)
which I do not really seem to understand
discrete-mathematics
asked Nov 30 '18 at 7:39
Sytoslav LickowizSytoslav Lickowiz
11
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Im new to the discrete mathematics scene and was wondering if I could confirm some stuff just to make sure i am getting the concepts correctly. All three of these questions deal specifically with quantifiers. so for the questions.
∃ at(King John, Stanford) ∧ smart (king john)
∀ at ( King John, Stanford) ^ smart ( king john)
so if I were to convert these to sentence's would it be:
There exists a person at Stanford named king john who is smart
Everyone named king john at Standford is smart
Im not really sure if these are correct as my book does not give me any way to check my answers & this is the only way to get my practice in.
and one more question for some reason in my readings it says that
∃x At (x, Standford) ⇒ Smart(x)
(would be true if there is anyone who is not at Stanford)
which I do not really seem to understand
discrete-mathematics
asked Nov 30 '18 at 7:39
Sytoslav LickowizSytoslav Lickowiz
11
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Im new to the discrete mathematics scene and was wondering if I could confirm some stuff just to make sure i am getting the concepts correctly. All three of these questions deal specifically with quantifiers. so for the questions.
∃ at(King John, Stanford) ∧ smart (king john)
∀ at ( King John, Stanford) ^ smart ( king john)
so if I were to convert these to sentence's would it be:
There exists a person at Stanford named king john who is smart
Everyone named king john at Standford is smart
Im not really sure if these are correct as my book does not give me any way to check my answers & this is the only way to get my practice in.
and one more question for some reason in my readings it says that
∃x At (x, Standford) ⇒ Smart(x)
(would be true if there is anyone who is not at Stanford)
which I do not really seem to understand
discrete-mathematics
asked Nov 30 '18 at 7:39
Sytoslav LickowizSytoslav Lickowiz
11
$endgroup$
Im new to the discrete mathematics scene and was wondering if I could confirm some stuff just to make sure i am getting the concepts correctly. All three of these questions deal specifically with quantifiers. so for the questions.
∃ at(King John, Stanford) ∧ smart (king john)
∀ at ( King John, Stanford) ^ smart ( king john)
so if I were to convert these to sentence's would it be:
There exists a person at Stanford named king john who is smart
Everyone named king john at Standford is smart
Im not really sure if these are correct as my book does not give me any way to check my answers & this is the only way to get my practice in.
and one more question for some reason in my readings it says that
∃x At (x, Standford) ⇒ Smart(x)
(would be true if there is anyone who is not at Stanford)
which I do not really seem to understand
discrete-mathematics
discrete-mathematics
asked Nov 30 '18 at 7:39
Sytoslav LickowizSytoslav Lickowiz
11
asked Nov 30 '18 at 7:39
Sytoslav LickowizSytoslav Lickowiz
11
edited Nov 30 '18 at 15:54
Sytoslav Lickowiz
asked Nov 30 '18 at 7:39
Sytoslav LickowizSytoslav Lickowiz
11
asked Nov 30 '18 at 7:39
Sytoslav LickowizSytoslav Lickowiz
11
asked Nov 30 '18 at 7:39
Sytoslav LickowizSytoslav Lickowiz
11
11
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Nothing seems correct.
Here are psuedo symbolic logic renderings of your English statements. Notice the needed parentheses.
Exists x with (x at Standford & x named King John & x is smart).
For all x, (x at Standford & x named King John implies x is smart).
answered Nov 30 '18 at 8:29
William ElliotWilliam Elliot
7,4062720
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019785%2fconfirmation-of-universal-and-existential-quantification%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Nothing seems correct.
Here are psuedo symbolic logic renderings of your English statements. Notice the needed parentheses.
Exists x with (x at Standford & x named King John & x is smart).
For all x, (x at Standford & x named King John implies x is smart).
answered Nov 30 '18 at 8:29
William ElliotWilliam Elliot
7,4062720
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Nothing seems correct.
Here are psuedo symbolic logic renderings of your English statements. Notice the needed parentheses.
Exists x with (x at Standford & x named King John & x is smart).
For all x, (x at Standford & x named King John implies x is smart).
answered Nov 30 '18 at 8:29
William ElliotWilliam Elliot
7,4062720
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Nothing seems correct.
Here are psuedo symbolic logic renderings of your English statements. Notice the needed parentheses.
Exists x with (x at Standford & x named King John & x is smart).
For all x, (x at Standford & x named King John implies x is smart).
answered Nov 30 '18 at 8:29
William ElliotWilliam Elliot
7,4062720
$endgroup$
Nothing seems correct.
Here are psuedo symbolic logic renderings of your English statements. Notice the needed parentheses.
Exists x with (x at Standford & x named King John & x is smart).
For all x, (x at Standford & x named King John implies x is smart).
answered Nov 30 '18 at 8:29
William ElliotWilliam Elliot
7,4062720
answered Nov 30 '18 at 8:29
William ElliotWilliam Elliot
7,4062720
answered Nov 30 '18 at 8:29
William ElliotWilliam Elliot
7,4062720
answered Nov 30 '18 at 8:29
William ElliotWilliam Elliot
7,4062720
7,4062720
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019785%2fconfirmation-of-universal-and-existential-quantification%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
