Dis Lecture 1-2

Discrete Mathematics
Lecture 1- Logics
Nurlan Ismailov
nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz
Astana IT University
Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

(Astana IT University)
Lecture 1- Logics 1 / 34
Main textbook
Our main textbook is
E. Goodaire and M. Parmenter

Discrete Mathematics with Graph Theory
(third edition)

What is Lecture 1 about?
Definition of Statement and Examples

Logical Operations and Truth Table
Logical Equivalences. Tautology and Contradiction
The Algebra of Statements and Examples
Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF)

1. Definition of Statement and Examples

Statement
Definition
A statement is an ordinary declarative English sentence of fact that can be
assigned a truth value; that is, it can be classified as being either true or false
(but not both).

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
There are 168 primes less than 1000

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
There are 168 primes less than 1000 statement

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
Seventeen is an even number

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
Seventeen is an even number statement

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
3 is a rational number

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
3 is a rational number statement

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
Zero is not a negative number

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
Zero is not a negative number statement

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
What are irrational numbers?

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
What are irrational numbers? not statement, because it is not declarative

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
Suppose every positive integer is the sum of three squares

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
not statement, because it has no truth value

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
x+1=2

Statement
Definition
(but not both).
Examples
√ √3
x + 1 = 2 not statement, because it has no unique truth value

2. Logical Operations and Truth Table

Compound statements. “and” ∧ and “or” ∨
Using the words “and” and “or” one can form new statements from other
statements. These new statements are said to be compound statements.

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100
7 + 5 = 12 or 571 is the 123th prime

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100
7 + 5 = 12 or 571 is the 123th prime
25 is less than 25 or equal to 25

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100
7 + 5 = 12 or 571 is the 123th prime
√
5 is an even number or 8 > 3

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100
7 + 5 = 12 or 571 is the 123th prime
√
Question
How does the truth of “and” and “or” compound statements depend on truth
of its parts?

We use lowercase letters of the alphabet to represent statements, such as
p, q, r, ....

p, q, r, ....
Let p and q be statements.

p, q, r, ....

p and q will be written as p ∧ q (conjunction of p and q)
we read it as “p and q”.

p, q, r, ....

Definition
p ∧ q is true if both p and q are true; it is false if either p is false or q is false.

p, q, r, ....

Definition
The definition above can be neatly summarized by tables so-called truth

tables. The truth table for p ∧ q is the following.

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q
F F

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q
F F
F T

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q
F F
F T
T F

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q
F F
F T
T F
T T

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q p∧q
F F
F T
T F
T T

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q p∧q
F F F
F T
T F
T T

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q p∧q
F F F
F T F
T F
T T

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q p∧q
F F F
F T F
T F F
T T

p, q, r, ....

Definition

p q p∧q
F F F
F T F
T F F
T T T

p or q will be written as p ∨ q (disjunction of p and q)
we read it as “p or q”.

Definition
p ∨ q is true if p is true or q is true or both p and q are true; it is false only
when both p and q are false.

Definition
Truth table for p ∨ q is the following.

Definition

p q p∨q
F F
F T
T F
T T

Definition

p q p∨q
F F F
F T
T F
T T

Definition

p q p∨q
F F F
F T T
T F
T T

Definition

p q p∨q
F F F
F T T
T F T
T T

Definition

p q p∨q
F F F
F T T
T F T
T T T

Now let us determine truth values of above considered examples

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π True

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π True
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π True
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100 True

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π True
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100 True
7 + 5 = 12 or 571 is the 123th prime

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π True
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100 True
7 + 5 = 12 or 571 is the 123th prime True

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π True
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100 True

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π True
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100 True
25 is less than 25 or equal to 25 True

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π True
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100 True
√

Examples
32 = 9 and 3.14 < π True
−22 = −4 and 5 < 100 True
√
5 is an even number or 8 > 3 False

Compound statements with Implication →
Many mathematical statements are implications, that is, “p implies q” or “if p

then q”, where p is called the hypothesis and q is called conclusion.
p implies q will be written as p → q


Examples
2 is an even integer implies 4 is an even integer.
If it is sunny tomorrow, then you may go swimming


Examples
2 is an even integer implies 4 is an even integer.
If it is sunny tomorrow, then you may go swimming
Definition
The implication p → q is false only when the hypothesis p is true and the
conclusion q is false. In all other situations, it is true.

Truth table for p → q is the following.

p q p→q
F F
F T
T F
T T

p q p→q
F F T
F T
T F
T T

p q p→q
F F T
F T T
T F
T T

p q p→q
F F T
F T T
T F F
T T

p q p→q
F F T
F T T
T F F
T T T

p q p→q
F F T Why?
F T T
T F F
T T T

p q p→q
F F T Why? The false implies anything!
F T T
T F F
T T T

p q p→q
F T T Why?
T F F
T T T

p q p→q
F T T Why? By the same reason
T F F
T T T

Another compound statement: Double Implication ↔
Another compound statement that we will use is the double implication p ↔ q

read “p if and only if q”.
As the notation suggests, the statement p ↔ q is simply a convenient way to
express p → q and q → p.

Another compound statement: Double Implication ↔
Another compound statement that we will use is the double implication p ↔ q

read “p if and only if q”.
As the notation suggests, the statement p ↔ q is simply a convenient way to
express p → q and q → p.
Examples
2 is an even number if and only if 4 is an even number.
2 is an even number if and only if 5 is an even number.

Definition
The double implication p ↔ q is true if p and q have the same truth values; it
is false if p and q have different truth values.

Definition
The truth table for p ↔ q is the following.

p q p↔q
F F
F T
T F
T T

Definition

p q p↔q
F F T
F T
T F
T T

Definition

p q p↔q
F F T
F T F
T F
T T

Definition

p q p↔q
F F T
F T F
T F F
T T

Definition

p q p↔q
F F T
F T F
T F F
T T T

Negation of a statement: p̄
The negation of a statement p is the statement that asserts that p is not true.
We denote the negation of p by p̄ and say “not p”.

Example
The negation of “x equals 4” is the statement “x does not equal 4” or x ̸= 4.

Example
The truth table for p̄ is the following.

p p̄
F
T

Example

p p̄
F T
T

Example

p p̄
F T
T F

Complicated compound statements
The truth tables for more complicated compound statements can be

constructed using the truth tables we have seen so far.


Example
Suppose we want the truth table for p → (p ∨ q).


Example
p q
F F
F T
T F
T T


Example
p q p∨q
F F
F T
T F
T T


Example
p q p∨q
F F F
F T
T F
T T


Example
p q p∨q
F F F
F T T
T F
T T


Example
p q p∨q
F F F
F T T
T F T
T T


Example
p q p∨q
F F F
F T T
T F T
T T T


Example
p q p∨q p∨q
F F F
F T T
T F T
T T T


Example
p q p∨q p∨q
F F F T
F T T
T F T
T T T


Example
p q p∨q p∨q
F F F T
F T T F
T F T
T T T


Example
p q p∨q p∨q
F F F T
F T T F
T F T F
T T T


Example
p q p∨q p∨q
F F F T
F T T F
T F T F
T T T F


Example
p q p ∨ q p ∨ q p → (p ∨ q)
F F F T
F T T F
T F T F
T T T F


Example
p q p ∨ q p ∨ q p → (p ∨ q)
F F F T T
F T T F
T F T F
T T T F


Example
p q p ∨ q p ∨ q p → (p ∨ q)
F F F T T
F T T F T
T F T F
T T T F


Example
p q p ∨ q p ∨ q p → (p ∨ q)
F F F T T
F T T F T
T F T F F
T T T F


Example
p q p ∨ q p ∨ q p → (p ∨ q)
F F F T T
F T T F T
T F T F F
T T T F F


Example
p q p ∨ q p ∨ q p → (p ∨ q)
F F F T T
F T T F T
T F T F F
T T T F F
When three statements say p, q and r are involved, 8 rows are required in a
truth table since it is necessary to consider the two possible truth values for r
for each of the four possible truth values of p and q.

Example
A = (p ∨ q) ↔ ((p̄ ∧ r) → (q ∧ r))
p q r

Example
A = (p ∨ q) ↔ ((p̄ ∧ r) → (q ∧ r))
p q r p̄ p̄ ∧ r q∧r (p̄ ∧ r) → (q ∧ r) p∨q A
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F T
T T F
T F F
F T F
F F F

Example
A = (p ∨ q) ↔ ((p̄ ∧ r) → (q ∧ r))
T T T F
T F T F
F T T T
F F T T
T T F F
T F F F
F T F T
F F F T

Example
A = (p ∨ q) ↔ ((p̄ ∧ r) → (q ∧ r))
T T T F F
T F T F F
F T T T T
F F T T T
T T F F F
T F F F F
F T F T F
F F F T F

Example
A = (p ∨ q) ↔ ((p̄ ∧ r) → (q ∧ r))
T T T F F T
T F T F F F
F T T T T T
F F T T T F
T T F F F F
T F F F F F
F T F T F F
F F F T F F

Example
A = (p ∨ q) ↔ ((p̄ ∧ r) → (q ∧ r))
T T T F F T T
T F T F F F T
F T T T T T T
F F T T T F F
T T F F F F T
T F F F F F T
F T F T F F T
F F F T F F T

Example
A = (p ∨ q) ↔ ((p̄ ∧ r) → (q ∧ r))
T T T F F T T T
T F T F F F T T
F T T T T T T T
F F T T T F F F
T T F F F F T T
T F F F F F T T
F T F T F F T T
F F F T F F T F

Example
A = (p ∨ q) ↔ ((p̄ ∧ r) → (q ∧ r))
T T T F F T T T T
T F T F F F T T T
F T T T T T T T T
F F T T T F F F T
T T F F F F T T T
T F F F F F T T T
F T F T F F T T T
F F F T F F T F F

3. Logical Equivalences. Tautology and Contradiction

Logical Equivalence
Definition
Statements p and q are are said to be logically equivalent if they have identical
truth tables.

Logical Equivalence
Definition
truth tables.
Example
p → q and q̄ → p̄ are logically equivalent.

Logical Equivalence
Definition
truth tables.
Example
p → q and q̄ → p̄ are logically equivalent.
p q p→q p q q̄ p̄ q̄ → p̄
F F T F F T T T
F T T F T F T T
T F F T F T F F
T T T T T F F T

Tautology and Contradiction
Definition
A compound statement that is always true, regardless of the truth values
assigned to its variables, is a tautology. A compound statement that is always
false is a contradiction.

Definition
Examples
p ∨ p̄ is a tautology.
p ∧ p̄ is a contradiction.

Definition
Examples
p ∨ p̄ is a tautology.
p ∧ p̄ is a contradiction.
p p̄ p ∨ p̄ p p̄ p ∧ p̄
F T T F T F
T F T T F F

Example
Show that (p ∧ q) → (p ∨ q) is a tautology.

Example
Proof:

Example
Proof:
Suppose that (p ∧ q) → (p ∨ q) is not a tautology.

Example
Proof:
Then for some p and q our statement has the false value.

Example
Proof:
By the truth table of implication (p ∧ q) → (p ∨ q) is false only when
p ∧ q is true and p ∨ q is false.

Example
Proof:
p ∧ q is true if and only if both p and q are true.

Example
Proof:
On the other hand, p ∨ q is false if and only if both p and q is false.

Example
Proof:
However, it is impossible. So we can not suppose that (p ∧ q) → (p ∨ q) is not

a tautology.

Example
Proof:
However, it is impossible. So we can not suppose that (p ∧ q) → (p ∨ q) is not

a tautology.
Therefore, (p ∧ q) → (p ∨ q) is a tautology. □
Example
Show that (p̄ ∧ q) ∧ (p ∨ q̄) is a contradiction.

Example
Proof:

Example
Proof:
Suppose that (p̄ ∧ q) ∧ (p ∨ q̄) is not a contradiction.

Example
Proof:
Then for some p and q our statement has the true value.

Example
Proof:
By by the truth table of “And” (p̄ ∧ q) ∧ (p ∨ q̄) is true only when
both p̄ ∧ q and p ∨ q̄ are true.

Example
Proof:
p̄ ∧ q is true if and only if p is false and q is true.

Example
Proof:
Then p ∨ q̄ will be false, which is impossible.

Example
Proof:
So, we can not suppose that (p̄ ∧ q) ∧ (p ∨ q̄) is not a contradiction.

Example
Proof:
So, we can not suppose that (p̄ ∧ q) ∧ (p ∨ q̄) is not a contradiction.
Therefore, (p̄ ∧ q) ∧ (p ∨ q̄) is a contradiction. □

4. The Algebra of Statements and Examples

The Algebra of Statements and ⇔

Let A and B be some statements.

If A and B are logically equivalent, then A ↔ B is a tautology.

If A and B are logically equivalent, then A ↔ B is a tautology.
We use the notation A ⇔ B to denote the fact that A and B are logically
equivalent.

Some Basic Logical Equivalences

Some Basic Logical Equivalences
1. Idempotence: 4. Distributivity:
p∨p⇔p (p ∨ (q ∧ r)) ⇔ ((p ∨ q) ∧ (p ∨ r))
p∧p⇔p (p ∧ (q ∨ r)) ⇔ ((p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r))
2. Commutativity:
5. Double Negation:
(p ∨ q) ⇔ (q ∨ p)
p⇔p
(p ∧ q) ⇔ (q ∧ p)
3. Associativity: 6. De Morgan’s Laws:
((p ∨ q) ∨ r) ⇔ (p ∨ (q ∨ r)) p∨q ⇔p∧q
((p ∧ q) ∧ r) ⇔ (p ∧ (q ∧ r)) p∧q ⇔p∨q

1 and 0
By 1 we denote a tautology and by 0 a contradiction.
Then we add the following properties to our list:
7. 9.
(p ∨ 1) ⇔ 1 (p ∨ p) ⇔ 1
(p ∧ 1) ⇔ p (p ∧ p) ⇔ 0
8. 10.
(p ∨ 0) ⇔ p 1⇔0
(p ∧ 0) ⇔ 0 0⇔1

1 and 0
7. 9.
(p ∨ 1) ⇔ 1 (p ∨ p) ⇔ 1
(p ∧ 1) ⇔ p (p ∧ p) ⇔ 0
8. 10.
(p ∨ 0) ⇔ p 1⇔0
(p ∧ 0) ⇔ 0 0⇔1
We add three more properties

11. (p → q) ⇔ (q → p)
12. (p → q) ⇔ (p ∨ q)
13. (p ↔ q) ⇔ ((p → q) ∧ (q → p))

1 and 0
7. 9.
(p ∨ 1) ⇔ 1 (p ∨ p) ⇔ 1
(p ∧ 1) ⇔ p (p ∧ p) ⇔ 0
8. 10.
(p ∨ 0) ⇔ p 1⇔0
(p ∧ 0) ⇔ 0 0⇔1
We add three more properties

11. (p → q) ⇔ (q → p)
12. (p → q) ⇔ (p ∨ q)
13. (p ↔ q) ⇔ ((p → q) ∧ (q → p))

Proof of all these properties: Just construct the truth table of each
statement and then apply to them the definition of logically equivalent
statements □
Example
Show that p → (p → q) is tautology.

Example
Proof. By Property 12 we have
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)
⇔ (p ∨ p) ∨ q

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)
⇔ (p ∨ p) ∨ q ⇔ (1 ∨ q)

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)
⇔ (p ∨ p) ∨ q ⇔ (1 ∨ q) ⇔ 1 □

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)
⇔ (p ∨ p) ∨ q ⇔ (1 ∨ q) ⇔ 1 □
Example
Simplify the statement p ∨ q ∨ (p ∧ q)

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)
⇔ (p ∨ p) ∨ q ⇔ (1 ∨ q) ⇔ 1 □
Example
Solution. By De Morgan’s Law
p ∨ q ∨ (p ∧ q) ⇔ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q)

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)
⇔ (p ∨ p) ∨ q ⇔ (1 ∨ q) ⇔ 1 □
Example
p ∨ q ∨ (p ∧ q) ⇔ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q)
⇔ p ∧ (q ∨ q)

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)
⇔ (p ∨ p) ∨ q ⇔ (1 ∨ q) ⇔ 1 □
Example
p ∨ q ∨ (p ∧ q) ⇔ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q)
⇔ p ∧ (q ∨ q) ⇔ p ∧ 1

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)
⇔ (p ∨ p) ∨ q ⇔ (1 ∨ q) ⇔ 1 □
Example
p ∨ q ∨ (p ∧ q) ⇔ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q)
⇔ p ∧ (q ∨ q) ⇔ p ∧ 1 ⇔ p □

Example
p → (p → q) ⇔ p → (p ∨ q)
⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q) ⇔ p ∨ (p ∨ q)
⇔ (p ∨ p) ∨ q ⇔ (1 ∨ q) ⇔ 1 □
Example
p ∨ q ∨ (p ∧ q) ⇔ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q)
⇔ p ∧ (q ∨ q) ⇔ p ∧ 1 ⇔ p □
So, the given statement is logically equivalent simply to p.

5. Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF)

Disjunctive normal form (DNF)

Definition (minterm)
Let n ≥ 1 be an integer and let x1 , x2 , . . . , xn be variables. A minterm based
on these variables is a compound statement of the form
a1 ∧ a2 ∧ · · · ∧ an ,
where each ai is xi or xi .

Definition (minterm)
Let n ≥ 1 be an integer and let x1 , x2 , . . . , xn be variables. A minterm based
on these variables is a compound statement of the form
a1 ∧ a2 ∧ · · · ∧ an ,
where each ai is xi or xi .
Definition (Disjunctive normal form)

A compound statement in x1 , x2 , . . . , xn is said to be in disjunctive normal
form or just (DNF) if it looks like
y1 ∨ y2 ∨ · · · ∨ ym
where the statements y1 , y2 , . . . , ym are different minterms.

Examples
x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 is a minterm on variables x1 , x2 , x3 .
(x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) ∨ (x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) is a DNF.
(p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q) is in disjunctive normal form on variables p, q.
(p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q) is not a DNF (because two minterms are the
same).
p ∧ (q ∨ r) is not a minterm (because it involes the symbol ∨).
((p ∧ q) ∨ r) ∧ ((p ∧ q) ∨ q) is not a DNF, one reason being that the
minterms (p ∧ q) ∨ r and (p ∧ q) ∨ q involve the symbol ∨.

Examples
(x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) ∨ (x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) is a DNF.
same).

Examples
(x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) ∨ (x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) is a DNF.
same).

Examples
(x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) ∨ (x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) is a DNF.
same).

Examples
(x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) ∨ (x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) is a DNF.
same).

Examples
(x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) ∨ (x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) is a DNF.
same).

Examples
(x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) ∨ (x1 ∧ x2 ∧ x3 ) is a DNF.
same).
In fact, we can construct DNF of any (compound) statement which is not a

contradiction. There are two main methods to do that. The first method by
logical equivalences and the second method through truth table. Below we will
demonstrate both of them.

Method 1 (By Logical Equivalences)

Proposition
x ⇔ (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ y) for any statements x and y.

Proposition
Proof
x ⇔ (x ∧ 1)

Proposition
Proof
x ⇔ (x ∧ 1) ⇔ (x ∧ (y ∨ y))

Proposition
Proof
x ⇔ (x ∧ 1) ⇔ (x ∧ (y ∨ y)) ⇔ (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ y) □

Proposition
Proof
x ⇔ (x ∧ 1) ⇔ (x ∧ (y ∨ y)) ⇔ (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ y) □
This proposition is simple but important in finding DNF.

Proposition
Proof
x ⇔ (x ∧ 1) ⇔ (x ∧ (y ∨ y)) ⇔ (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ y) □
Example
Express p → (q ∧ r) in disjunctive normal form.

Proposition
Proof
x ⇔ (x ∧ 1) ⇔ (x ∧ (y ∨ y)) ⇔ (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ y) □
Example
Solution.
p → (q ∧ r) ⇔ p ∨ (q ∧ r)

Proposition
Proof
x ⇔ (x ∧ 1) ⇔ (x ∧ (y ∨ y)) ⇔ (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ y) □
Example
Solution.
p → (q ∧ r) ⇔ p ∨ (q ∧ r) ⇔ ((p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q)) ∨ (q ∧ r)

Proposition
Proof
x ⇔ (x ∧ 1) ⇔ (x ∧ (y ∨ y)) ⇔ (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ y) □
Example
Solution.
p → (q ∧ r) ⇔ p ∨ (q ∧ r) ⇔ ((p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q)) ∨ (q ∧ r)
⇔ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r)

Proposition
Proof
x ⇔ (x ∧ 1) ⇔ (x ∧ (y ∨ y)) ⇔ (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ y) □
Example
Solution.
p → (q ∧ r) ⇔ p ∨ (q ∧ r) ⇔ ((p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ q)) ∨ (q ∧ r)
⇔ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r)
⇔ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) □

Method 2 (By Truth Table)

Example
We construct a truth table for p → (q ∧ r)
p q r q∧r p → (q ∧ r)
T T T T T
T F T F F
F T T T T
F F T F T
T T F F F
T F F F F
F T F F T
F F F F T

Example
p q r q∧r p → (q ∧ r)
T T T T T ←
T F T F F
F T T T T ←
F F T F T ←
T T F F F
T F F F F
F T F F T ←
F F F F T ←
Now focus on the rows for which the statement is true.

Example
p q r q∧r p → (q ∧ r)
T T T T T ←
T F T F F
F T T T T ←
F F T F T ←
T T F F F
T F F F F
F T F F T ←
F F F F T ←
Now focus on the rows for which the statement is true. Each of these will
contribute a minterm to our answer.

Example
p q r q∧r p → (q ∧ r)
T T T T T ←
T F T F F
F T T T T ←
F F T F T ←
T T F F F
T F F F F
F T F F T ←
F F F F T ←
Now focus on the rows for which the statement is true. Each of these will
contribute a minterm to our answer.
Row 1 gives the minterm p ∧ q ∧ r. Row 7 gives the minterm p ∧ q ∧ r.

Row 3 row gives the minterm p ∧ q ∧ r. Row 8 gives the minterm p ∧ q ∧ r.
Row 4 gives the minterm p ∧ q ∧ r.
Then we join all the minterms with disjunction ∨ as follows
(p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r).

Observations:
We see that the obtained expression is a DNF on variables p, q and r.
We note that it is logically equivalent to p → (q ∧ r). (Why?)

Observations:
Hence,
(p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r)
is a DNF of p → (q ∧ r) □

Observations:
Hence,
(p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r) ∨ (p ∧ q ∧ r)
is a DNF of p → (q ∧ r) □
We leave it to you to decide for yourself which method you prefer.

The End of Lecture 1


Dis Lecture 1-2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dis Lecture 1-2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Discrete Mathematics

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Our main textbook is

E. Goodaire and M. Parmenter

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Definition of Statement and Examples

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

The definition above can be neatly summarized by tables so-called truth

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

The definition above can be neatly summarized by tables so-called truth

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

The definition above can be neatly summarized by tables so-called truth

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

The definition above can be neatly summarized by tables so-called truth

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

The definition above can be neatly summarized by tables so-called truth

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

The definition above can be neatly summarized by tables so-called truth

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

The definition above can be neatly summarized by tables so-called truth

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz

Let p and q be statements.

The definition above can be neatly summarized by tables so-called truth

Nurlan Ismailov nurlan.ismailov@astanait.edu.kz