3.

3: Equivalence and Implication

Consider two propositions generated by [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error] and
[Math Processing Error] At first glance, they are different propositions. In form, they are different, but they have the same
meaning. One way to see this is to substitute actual propositions for [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error]
such as [Math Processing Error] I've been to Toronto; and [Math Processing Error] I've been to Chicago.
Then [Math Processing Error] translates to “I haven't been to both Toronto and Chicago,” while [Math Processing Error] is “I
haven't been to Toronto or I haven't been to Chicago.” Determine the truth values of these propositions. Naturally, they will
be true for some people and false for others. What is important is that no matter what truth values they have, [Math
Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] will have the same truth value. The easiest way to see this is by examining
the truth tables of these propositions.
Table [Math Processing Error]: Truth Tables for [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error]

[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
\(\neg (p\land q)\0 [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]

In all four cases, [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] have the same truth value. Furthermore, when the
biconditional operator is applied to them, the result is a value of true in all cases. A proposition such as this is called a
tautology.

3.3.1: Tautologies and Contradictions

Definition [Math Processing Error]: Tautology

An expression involving logical variables that is true in all cases is a tautology. The number 1 is used to symbolize a
tautology.

Example [Math Processing Error]: Some Tautologies

All of the following are tautologies because their truth tables consist of a column of 1's.
a. [Math Processing Error]
b. [Math Processing Error]
c. [Math Processing Error]
d. [Math Processing Error]
e. [Math Processing Error]

Definition [Math Processing Error]: Contradiction

An expression involving logical variables that is false for all cases is called a contradiction. The number 0 is used to
symbolize a contradiction.

Example [Math Processing Error]: Some Contradictions

[Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] are contradictions.

3.3.2: Equivalence
Definition [Math Processing Error]: Equivalence

Let [Math Processing Error] be a set of propositions and let [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] be
propositions generated by [Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] are equivalent
if and only if [Math Processing Error] is a tautology. The equivalence of [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing
Error] is denoted [Math Processing Error]

Equivalence is to logic as equality is to algebra. Just as there are many ways of writing an algebraic expression, the same
logical meaning can be expressed in many different ways.
 Example [Math Processing Error]: Some Equivalences

The following are all equivalences:

a. [Math Processing Error]
b. [Math Processing Error]
c. [Math Processing Error]

All tautologies are equivalent to one another.

Example [Math Processing Error]: An Equivalence to [Math Processing Error]

[Math Processing Error]

All contradictions are equivalent to one another.

Example [Math Processing Error]: An Equivalence to [Math Processing Error]

[Math Processing Error]

3.3.3: Implication
Consider the two propositions:
Table [Math Processing Error]

[Math Processing Error]: The money is behind Door A; and

[Math Processing Error]: The money is behind Door A or Door B

Imagine that you were told that there is a large sum of money behind one of two doors marked A and B, and that one of the
two propositions [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] is true and the other is false. Which door would you
choose? All that you need to realize is that if [Math Processing Error] is true, then [Math Processing Error] will also be true.
Since we know that this can't be the case, [Math Processing Error] must be the true proposition and the money is behind
Door B.
This is an example of a situation in which the truth of one proposition leads to the truth of another. Certainly, [Math
Processing Error] can be true when [Math Processing Error] is false; but [Math Processing Error] can't be true when [Math
Processing Error] is false. In this case, we say that [Math Processing Error] implies [Math Processing Error]
Consider the truth table of [Math Processing Error] Table 3.1.1. If [Math Processing Error] implies [Math Processing Error]
then the third case can be ruled out, since it is the case that makes a conditional proposition false.

Definition [Math Processing Error]: Implication

Let [Math Processing Error] be a set of propositions and let [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] be
propositions generated by [Math Processing Error] We say that [Math Processing Error] implies [Math Processing Error]
if [Math Processing Error] is a tautology. We write [Math Processing Error] to indicate this implication.

Example [Math Processing Error]: Disjunctive Addition

A commonly used implication called “disjunctive addition” is [Math Processing Error] which is verified by truth table
Table [Math Processing Error].

Table [Math Processing Error]: Truth Table to verify that [Math Processing Error]

[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]

If we let [Math Processing Error] represent “The money is behind Door A” and [Math Processing Error] represent “The
money is behind Door B,” [Math Processing Error] is a formalized version of the reasoning used in Example [Math
Processing Error]. A common name for this implication is disjunctive addition. In the next section we will consider some of
the most commonly used implications and equivalences.
When we defined what we mean by a Proposition Generated by a Set, Definition 3.2.1, we didn't include the conditional and
biconditional operators. This was because of the two equivalences [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error]
Therefore, any proposition that includes the conditional or biconditional operators can be written in an equivalent way
using only conjunction, disjunction, and negation. We could even dispense with disjunction since [Math Processing Error]
is equivalent to a proposition that uses only conjunction and negation.

3.3.4: Universal Operation

We close this section with a final logical operation, the Sheffer Stroke, that has the interesting property that all other logical
operations can be created from it. You can explore this operation in Exercise [Math Processing Error]

Definition [Math Processing Error]: The Sheffer Stroke

The Sheffer Stroke is the logical operator defined by the following truth table:
Table [Math Processing Error]: Truth Table for the Sheffer Stroke

[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]

[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]

3.3.5: Exercises
Exercise [Math Processing Error]

Given the following propositions generated by [Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing
Error] which are equivalent to one another?
a. [Math Processing Error]
b. [Math Processing Error]
c. [Math Processing Error]
d. [Math Processing Error]
e. [Math Processing Error]
f. [Math Processing Error]
g. [Math Processing Error]
h. [Math Processing Error]

Answer
[Math Processing Error]

Exercise [Math Processing Error]

a. Construct the truth table for [Math Processing Error]
b. Give an example other than [Math Processing Error] itself of a proposition generated by [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] that is equivalent to [Math Processing Error]
c. Give an example of a proposition other than [Math Processing Error] that implies [Math Processing Error]
d. Give an example of a proposition other than [Math Processing Error] that is implied by [Math Processing Error]

Exercise [Math Processing Error]

Is an implication equivalent to its converse? Verify your answer using a truth table.

Answer
No. In symbolic form the question is: Is [Math Processing Error]
[Math Processing Error]
This table indicates that an implication is not always equivalent to its converse.

Exercise [Math Processing Error]

Suppose that [Math Processing Error] is a proposition generated by [Math Processing Error] [Math Processing Error]
and [Math Processing Error] that is equivalent to [Math Processing Error] Write out the truth table for [Math Processing
Error]
 Exercise [Math Processing Error]

How large is the largest set of propositions generated by [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] with the
property that no two elements are equivalent?

Answer
Let [Math Processing Error] be any proposition generated by [Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error]
The truth table for [Math Processing Error] has 4 rows and there are 2 choices for a truth value for [Math Processing
Error] for each row, so there are [Math Processing Error] possible propositions.

Exercise [Math Processing Error]

Find a proposition that is equivalent to [Math Processing Error] and uses only conjunction and negation.

Exercise [Math Processing Error]

Explain why a contradiction implies any proposition and any proposition implies a tautology.

Answer
[Math Processing Error] and [Math Processing Error] are tautologies.

Exercise [Math Processing Error]

The significance of the Sheffer Stroke is that it is a “universal” operation in that all other logical operations can be built
from it.
a. Prove that [Math Processing Error] is equivalent to [Math Processing Error]
b. Prove that [Math Processing Error]
c. Build [Math Processing Error] using only the Sheffer Stroke.
d. Build [Math Processing Error] using only the Sheffer Stroke.

This page titled 3.3: Equivalence and Implication is shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated
by Al Doerr & Ken Levasseur via source content that was edited to the style and standards of the LibreTexts platform; a detailed edit
history is available upon request.