Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Without using truth table, show that
~r → ~ (p ∧ q) ≡ [~ (q → r)] → ~ p
Advertisements
उत्तर
L.H.S.
≡ ~r → ~ (p ∧ q)
≡ ~(~ r) ∨ ~ (p ∧ q) ....[p → q ≡ ~ p ∨ q]
≡ r ∨ ~(p ∧ q) ....[Negation of negation]
≡ r ∨ (~p ∨ ~q) ....[De Morgan’s law]
≡ ~p ∨ (~q ∨ r) .....[Commutative and associative law]
≡ ~p ∨ (q → r) ....[p → q ≡ ~ p ∨ q]
≡ (q → r) ∨ ~p ......[Commutative law]
≡ ~[~ (q → r)] ∨ ~ p ......[Negation of negation]
≡ [~ (q → r)] → ~ p .....[p → q ≡ ~ p ∨ q]
= R.H.S.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
The negation of p ∧ (q → r) is ______________.
Without using truth tabic show that ~(p v q)v(~p ∧ q) = ~p
Using the rules of negation, write the negatlon of the following:
(a) p ∧ (q → r)
(b) ~P ∨ ~q
Write the Truth Value of the Negation of the Following Statement :
The Sun sets in the East.
Without using truth table prove that:
∼ [(p ∨ ∼ q) → (p ∧ ∼ q)] ≡ (p ∨ ∼ q) ∧ (∼ p ∨ q)
Using rules in logic, prove the following:
∼ (p ∨ q) ∨ (∼p ∧ q) ≡ ∼p
Using the rules in logic, write the negation of the following:
p ∧ (q ∨ r)
Using the rules in logic, write the negation of the following:
(p → q) ∧ r
Using the rules in logic, write the negation of the following:
(∼p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ ∼q)
Let p ∧ (q ∨ r) ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r). Then, this law is known as ______.
Without using truth table, show that
p ↔ q ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (~p ∧ ~q)
Without using truth table, show that
p ∧ [(~ p ∨ q) ∨ ~ q] ≡ p
Without using truth table, show that
~ [(p ∧ q) → ~ q] ≡ p ∧ q
Without using truth table, show that
(p ∨ q) → r ≡ (p → r) ∧ (q → r)
The statement pattern p ∧ ( q v ~ p) is equivalent to ______.
For any two statements p and q, the negation of the expression (p ∧ ∼q) ∧ ∼p is ______
The logically equivalent statement of (p ∨ q) ∧ (p ∨ r) is ______
The statement pattern p ∧ (∼p ∧ q) is ______.
The statement pattern [∼r ∧ (p ∨ q) ∧ (p ∨ q) ∧ (∼p ∧ q)] is equivalent to ______
(p ∧ ∼q) ∧ (∼p ∧ q) is a ______.
Which of the following is not a statement?
Without using truth table, prove that:
[p ∧ (q ∨ r)] ∨ [∼r ∧ ∼q ∧ p] ≡ p
Without using truth table, prove that : [(p ∨ q) ∧ ∼p] →q is a tautology.
Without using truth table prove that
[(p ∧ q ∧ ∼ p) ∨ (∼ p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ ∼ q ∧ r) ≡ (p ∨ q) ∧ r
