[Discrete Mathematics] Negating Quantifiers and Translation Examples

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 เม.ย. 2016
  • LIKE AND SHARE THE VIDEO IF IT HELPED!
    Visit our website: bit.ly/1zBPlvm
    Subscribe on TH-cam: bit.ly/1vWiRxW
    -Playlists-
    Discrete Mathematics 1: • Discrete Math (Sets, L...
    Discrete Mathematics 2: • Discrete Math (Countin...
    -Recommended Textbooks-
    Discrete and Combinatorial Mathematics (Grimaldi): amzn.to/2T0iC53
    Discrete Mathematics (Johnsonbaugh): amzn.to/2Hh7H41
    Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications (Rosen): amzn.to/3lUgrMI
    Book of Proof (Hammack): amzn.to/35eEbVg
    Like us on Facebook: on. 1vWwDRc
    Submit your questions on Reddit: bit.ly/1GwZZrP
    In this video, we translate English sentences into quantificational logic and then negate some quantificational statements.
    Hello, welcome to TheTrevTutor. I'm here to help you learn your college courses in an easy, efficient manner. If you like what you see, feel free to subscribe and follow me for updates. If you have any questions, leave them below. I try to answer as many questions as possible. If something isn't quite clear or needs more explanation, I can easily make additional videos to satisfy your need for knowledge and understanding.

ความคิดเห็น • 50

  • @Trevtutor
    @Trevtutor  8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Check out my new course in Predicate Logic: trevtutor.com/p/master-discrete-mathematics-predicate-logic
    It comes with video lectures, text lectures, practice problems, solutions, and a practice final exam!

  • @9997eman
    @9997eman 7 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Thank you for your very clear examples!

  • @AliVeli-gr4fb
    @AliVeli-gr4fb 8 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    nice examples, thank you

  • @nan_jeremiahyoanes4118
    @nan_jeremiahyoanes4118 7 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks for nice and clear video

  • @nahomdesta1237
    @nahomdesta1237 ปีที่แล้ว

    Very helpful video.....thx man

  • @user-bu8mg7uq3s
    @user-bu8mg7uq3s 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    thank you

  • @ROC4Life96
    @ROC4Life96 5 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    In the last exercise, how did you go from Ex [ - (Px -> Qx) ] to Ex [ -(-Px v Qx) ] "-" denotes "not" and "E" denotes "there exists"?

    • @nahomdesta1237
      @nahomdesta1237 ปีที่แล้ว

      Because it's equivalent to the original value and is stated as the "law of implications" go browse this k 👍

  • @ES50678
    @ES50678 7 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Hi, I hate taking notes on paper, what note taking software are you using to make this video? I'm currently using my stylus/wacom tablet but the drawing software that comes with it is wayyyy more than I need to just take notes.

    • @Trevtutor
      @Trevtutor  7 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      windows journal

  • @abiokpobatubo
    @abiokpobatubo ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Thank you for your videos even after 6 years. I have a question, please how do you negate “For every strictly positive epsilon there exists a strictly positive delta such that |f(x)| < e (epsilon) whenever |x| < delta ?

    • @CodeKali
      @CodeKali 22 วันที่ผ่านมา

      ∃ε > 0, ∀ δ > 0 [ |x| < δ ∧ |f(x)| > ε ]
      I am not entirely certain though, and even if 1 year has passed I hope it is helpful.

  • @johanronkko4494
    @johanronkko4494 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    If i have some predicate so that it's statement is considered to be false, when i negate it does it become true? Is that how it works?

  • @lemyul
    @lemyul 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    ty

  • @lubababazlulmoon6457
    @lubababazlulmoon6457 8 ปีที่แล้ว

    Consider the compound proposition (Allm∃n [P(m,n)]implies( ∃nAllm[P(m,n)]) where both m and n are integers. Determine
    the truth value of the proposition if
    (a) P(m,n) is the statement “m < n”.
    (b) P(m,n) is the statement “m | n”. [By “m | n”,
    which we say as “m divides n”, we mean that n = km for some integer k.]
    how to do these? And it will be a great help if you make a video with similar problems like these.

  • @ti6252
    @ti6252 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I LOVE YOU

  • @mitchyemmen8077
    @mitchyemmen8077 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Isn't the second case at 2:06 incorrect? if x were to be -5 and y were to be -3/ 25 is >9 but -5 is not > -3.

    • @spamkaze
      @spamkaze 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Correct. Remember that a statement can be true or false. In this episode, I think Trev was just trying to show how to translate from words to notation, not necessarily giving a true theorem. You'd need absolute values around x and y (or some other modification) for the theorem to be true.

    • @yourroyalhighness6297
      @yourroyalhighness6297 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      the statement is:
      if x^2 > y^2, then x > y.
      let p = x^2 > y^2
      let q = x > y
      the statement is p➡q
      Truth Table :
      T for True
      F for False
      p q p➡q
      T T T
      T F F
      F T T
      F F T
      The statement p➡q would be false if p is True and q is False. That's the second row. So for your example, if x^2 > y^2 is True then x > y is False.
      Input values for p (hypothesis) before you input values for q (conclusion)
      x = -5 (but it could also be 5 since we input value on x^2 first)
      x^2 = 25
      y = -3 (but it could also be 3 since we input value on y^2 first)
      y^2 = 9
      Substitute (on the second row):
      If 25 > 9 is True, then -5 > -3 is False.
      This is true. But not for all x and y, because if x=5 then x^2 could still be 25 and if y=3 then y^2 could still be 9.
      If 25 > 9 is True, then 5 > 3 is False.
      This is false because 5 > 3 should be true right?
      Therefore, the second case in the video is correct. You just got confused with the correct statement "if x^2 > y^2, then x > y" because you thought it was "if x > y, then x^2 > y^2".
      Thanks for reading.

  • @nightravels4028
    @nightravels4028 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    A little confused here. In the previous video we learnt that ∃xPx ~Vx[~P(x)]
    So why is the first negation example in this video showing that ∃x (Px ^ Qx) Vx (~P(x) v ~Q(x)?
    Shouldn't the V quantifier have a ~ in front of it? I also tried applying the trick you showed in the previous video to negate quantifiers, and it gave me ~Vx (~Px v ~Qx )
    If anybody could clear this up it would be greatly appreciated

    • @ibrabi7072
      @ibrabi7072 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      ~Vx[~P(x)] is equal to ∃xPx, its not the negation of it. Since the question wants the negation of ∃x (Px ^ Qx) its going to be Vx (~P(x) v ~Q(x)). its like saying A = ~~A , but the negation of a is not ~~A its just ~A. i hope this cleared it up.

    • @nahomdesta1237
      @nahomdesta1237 ปีที่แล้ว

      The reason why V needn't to have - is cuz it's already the negated form is E

  • @lemyul
    @lemyul 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    i like the 3:05 part

  • @mubarizmirzayev35
    @mubarizmirzayev35 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hi, firstly thanks for this beneficial video :) My question is where did we know that (Px -> Qx) = ~Px v Qx, Thanks beforehand :)

    • @Trevtutor
      @Trevtutor  7 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Definition of the conditional. P -> Q is equivalent to ~P v Q.

    • @mubarizmirzayev35
      @mubarizmirzayev35 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      Thanks so much)

    • @hendrikfranss
      @hendrikfranss 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      You can use that equivalence to use "OR" instead of "Implication" for some equations

    • @RK003
      @RK003 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      ~(Px -> Qx)=Px and ~Qx

    • @nahomdesta1237
      @nahomdesta1237 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Trevtutor or law of implications, that is, right?

  • @anlberkearslantas3813
    @anlberkearslantas3813 ปีที่แล้ว

    does any one know why he did add "-" at 3:51

  • @huizylove
    @huizylove ปีที่แล้ว

    4:00

  • @mihailmojsoski4202
    @mihailmojsoski4202 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    4:16 that looks like a C function pointer a little

  • @manjitshakya6457
    @manjitshakya6457 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Express this statement using quantifiers:
    “Every student in this class has taken some course in every department in the school of mathematical sciences.”

    • @IvanKleshnin
      @IvanKleshnin 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      My attempt: ∀ x, ∀ D [S(x) -> ∃C [D(C) ∧ C(x)]]. For all people x, for all departments D, if x is a student in this class: S(x) then there exists a course C such that a) this course was taken by the student: C(x) and b) the course belongs to a department: D(C).

  • @mbarq2
    @mbarq2 7 ปีที่แล้ว

    @5:09, you meant "There is some number that is odd AND even", right?? since that's what [∃x(Px^Qx)] translates to, no? Then you negate it to "There is not a single number that is odd or even", or ¬[∃x(Px^Qx)]

    • @yourroyalhighness6297
      @yourroyalhighness6297 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      I think if you write ¬[∃x(Px^Qx)] and translate it, it would become ∃x(¬Px v ¬Qx)]. The AND would change into OR if the negation is distributed inside the parenthesis. And as far as I have learned, it's a rule in propositional logic. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just a beginner on this topic, sorry.

  • @mohamedasim776
    @mohamedasim776 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Why is it for all x (s(x) arrow m(x) or c(x))?
    Is it supposed to be for all x (m(x) or c(x))?
    My question is on the first sentence of translation

    • @Trevtutor
      @Trevtutor  5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      If you say "all x (mx or cs)" then you're saying everything IN THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE is either m(x) or c(x).

    • @mohamedasim776
      @mohamedasim776 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Trevtutor So What's the point in that?

    • @yourroyalhighness6297
      @yourroyalhighness6297 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@mohamedasim776 The point is that you didn't declare what is x. If you put S(x) then it would be recognizable as a student. If you say for all x (m(x) or c(x)) then you're including everything (or everyone) 'in the entire universe' to be taking major in Math or CompSci even though they are not students. This is what I understood, sorry if I interpreted it wrong.

  • @marvinbadilla4541
    @marvinbadilla4541 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Why didn't you negate all your quantifiers as example? It would be so helpful

  • @birdt12742
    @birdt12742 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    5:16
    Q:- Write a nontrivial negation:
    - Between any integer and any larger integer, there is a real number.
    What the solution???

    • @Trevtutor
      @Trevtutor  8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Work with turning it into symbols first.
      Three things you’re talking about. Any integer x and any integer y. Then there’s a z in between
      For all x, for all y, there exists a z such that x

  • @saifchannel6005
    @saifchannel6005 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hi mate ,
    can u help me on this?
    1. a) Consider the statement:
    For every integer x and every integer y there is an integer n such that
    if then .
    i. Translate the statement into symbols. Clearly state which statement is the proposition p and which is the proposition q, the quantifiers and the connectives.

    • @nahomdesta1237
      @nahomdesta1237 ปีที่แล้ว

      What does this mean...i mean it's kinda incomplete I guess

  • @kunsyeri5805
    @kunsyeri5805 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    YAWA KJA

  • @user-wr8en6oe5k
    @user-wr8en6oe5k 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    my brain is not braining atp

  • @JROD082384
    @JROD082384 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    What does any of this even mean?
    Were you even speaking English?