Check out my new course in Propositional Logic: trevtutor.com/p/master-discrete-mathematics-propositional-logic It comes with video lectures, text lectures, practice problems, solutions, and a practice final exam!
Mans dropped a banger after being in hiatus for six-months. Thanks, Trev. Your content is always top-quality, a free education punching above its own class.
AH, omg, the way I got excited when I saw you came back with a banger after 7 months!!! I honestly missed your videos and I need this so much. Saving our lives again, thanks king
Are you going to make a similar video for Predicate logic? You're carrying the math of my Ai undergrad on your shoulders. I hope i can support you in the future. Thank you so much!
hi trev, just wanted to let you know i love you :'D i was really hoping if you could cover calculus 3 as well, I'm taking it next semester and you're videos are so clear and concise and helpful, you're my go to when trying to learn math (you helped me so much in discrete and linear!) i would really appreciate it! hope you see this D:
I've been watching a number of your videos -- clear and excellent explanations, thank you. However, I have to object to your equating of the English "unless" to logical OR here and in another video. It is not the same. For example, let's consider the sentence "I'm going to the party, unless you are going to the same party". It can be rephrased without the use of "unless" as "If you are going to the party, I'm not going. If you are not going, I'm going." So, the truth table looks like this: 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 The original sentence can only be true if (and only if) only one of us is at the party. Both of us cannot be there (first line), because I said I'm not going if you are going. And none of us cannot be there (last line), because I said I'm going if you are not going. The truth table is different from OR's table, and is actually the same as XOR. What am I missing?
I have watched much of yours and others on formal logic but I keep coming across confusing terms: Do you mind helping me for predicate logic in explaining the difference between the following terms “interpretation” “structure” “semantics” “model” “theory”. Maybe visually also like if each fits inside another?
This is going to sound pretty wild but what if for the implication table the last to options for p and q actually result in the answer 1 and 0 instead of 1. Effectively p and q are in a superposition until we know if we get desert or not 🎂.
Thank you so much for this, you really explained 6 lectures worth of material (with 20-30 slides per lecture) in time frame of a single lecture. Not only did you do this, but you did it in a way that was intuitive and really "clicked" with me. Again, thank you!
Trev,at 27:32 I get (0,0,1,0) for (p & ̴ q )because in my table I listed "q" first and "p" in the second column, so my final result became(1,0,1,0) ! The reason I thought that I must list q in the first column was that in the WFF we have (q→ ̴ p). Can you explain, what is the logical order of listing the variables in our table please? because then my result is q and not p!
i learned so much about propositional logic and the terms again since I have forgotten it already!! these onclude conjunction, disjunction, biconditional, negation, and implication. this is also very uselful in real life applications! These examples really helped with my skills in reasons and validating arguments
Thank you very much! With this, I already feel more confident in passing the logic exam and not failing it again like the first time. Especially the inference rules make waay more sense now! Wish all profs explained matters like this! (And not with long-winded book explanations...)
18:06 I like it as if it were a promise. Whether you return and fulfill the promise or not, the statement is true. If you promise me and fulfill the promise, then the statement is true only if you keep your word.
wow, the editing and clear instructions are just perfect! you have a talent for chopping up discrete math into easier bits for me to chew! thank you for taking the time to make this video !!! :)))
Check out my new course in Propositional Logic: trevtutor.com/p/master-discrete-mathematics-propositional-logic
It comes with video lectures, text lectures, practice problems, solutions, and a practice final exam!
All the homies listen to The Ultimate Guide to Propositional Logic for Discrete Mathematics
You explained everything ten times better than my college professor, who I felt like speaking an alien language in class. Much appreciated 👍
Mans dropped a banger after being in hiatus for six-months. Thanks, Trev. Your content is always top-quality, a free education punching above its own class.
Wow! Look at me with Discrete Math exam tomorrow.
Bro JUST in time for my final tomorrow! You are the clutch king my good sir
was your final for intro to discrete math, and if so, was it just propositional logic?
Same here
today I was watching your old videos to understand discrete maths better and I just realized you posted something 1 hour ago, coincidence? :O
AH, omg, the way I got excited when I saw you came back with a banger after 7 months!!! I honestly missed your videos and I need this so much. Saving our lives again, thanks king
Are you going to make a similar video for Predicate logic?
You're carrying the math of my Ai undergrad on your shoulders. I hope i can support you in the future. Thank you so much!
Thank you! Will be very useful for me
Self-studying here because for now I don't have the financial power to pursue😂. And I am tutoring some students to earn and learn 😉
hi trev, just wanted to let you know i love you :'D i was really hoping if you could cover calculus 3 as well, I'm taking it next semester and you're videos are so clear and concise and helpful, you're my go to when trying to learn math (you helped me so much in discrete and linear!) i would really appreciate it! hope you see this D:
Mann, Thank you,, I might understand this time, 1 hr and 30 min. in college isn't enough to understand this thing.
Thx dude, this is gonna save my ass on my test tomorrow. I didn’t think I signed up for this when I started studying philosophy xD (jkjk)
i never thought i would love to watch an entire logic lesson thank you so much
You are better than my professor. He had me thinking I was an idiot you showed me how easy this all really is. 🙏🏾🙏🏾
Saving my ass in discrete maths 1 in uni, you're the reason I'm passing thank u so much!
How did you know my final exam is tomorrow?
the implication operator can also be expressed as p->q = max(1-val(p),val(q))
I've been watching a number of your videos -- clear and excellent explanations, thank you. However, I have to object to your equating of the English "unless" to logical OR here and in another video. It is not the same. For example, let's consider the sentence "I'm going to the party, unless you are going to the same party".
It can be rephrased without the use of "unless" as "If you are going to the party, I'm not going. If you are not going, I'm going."
So, the truth table looks like this:
1 1 0
1 0 1
0 1 1
0 0 0
The original sentence can only be true if (and only if) only one of us is at the party. Both of us cannot be there (first line), because I said I'm not going if you are going. And none of us cannot be there (last line), because I said I'm going if you are not going.
The truth table is different from OR's table, and is actually the same as XOR.
What am I missing?
I have watched much of yours and others on formal logic but I keep coming across confusing terms: Do you mind helping me for predicate logic in explaining the difference between the following terms “interpretation” “structure” “semantics” “model” “theory”. Maybe visually also like if each fits inside another?
This is going to sound pretty wild but what if for the implication table the last to options for p and q actually result in the answer 1 and 0 instead of 1. Effectively p and q are in a superposition until we know if we get desert or not 🎂.
Thank you so much. You just saved me from failing one of my courses. Your content is really unique. Makes this stuff understandable and so easy
Thank you for you Trev ! I've watched all of ur videos and it helped me a lot ❤❤
Thank you so much for this, you really explained 6 lectures worth of material (with 20-30 slides per lecture) in time frame of a single lecture. Not only did you do this, but you did it in a way that was intuitive and really "clicked" with me.
Again, thank you!
Was just watching Propositional logic in the Discrete Maths playlist and this popped up! Thanks a lot a lot a LOT for making these videos!!
Update: It went well, thanks a lot for making those videos!!
Trev,at 27:32 I get (0,0,1,0) for (p & ̴ q )because in my table I listed "q" first and "p" in the second column, so my final result became(1,0,1,0) ! The reason I thought that I must list q in the first column was that in the WFF we have (q→ ̴ p). Can you explain, what is the logical order of listing the variables in our table please? because then my result is q and not p!
You can introduce them in whatever order you see fit, but the resultant table will be different. Usually it’s alphabetical.
Thanks, Trev! Very neat explanation, and this propositional logic part of math is so fun!
Thanks a lot trev. Your videos were so helpful
Great vids! Thanks!
"Just in case that" makes sense if you add the missing article: "Just (only) in the case that".
i learned so much about propositional logic and the terms again since I have forgotten it already!! these onclude conjunction, disjunction, biconditional, negation, and implication. this is also very uselful in real life applications! These examples really helped with my skills in reasons and validating arguments
Super happy to see you post again :) love your videos
Thank you very much! With this, I already feel more confident in passing the logic exam and not failing it again like the first time. Especially the inference rules make waay more sense now! Wish all profs explained matters like this! (And not with long-winded book explanations...)
18:06
I like it as if it were a promise. Whether you return and fulfill the promise or not, the statement is true. If you promise me and fulfill the promise, then the statement is true only if you keep your word.
53 min I don't understand how you made the jump to Modus Tollens. Can you break down the steps more?
wow, the editing and clear instructions are just perfect! you have a talent for chopping up discrete math into easier bits for me to chew! thank you for taking the time to make this video !!! :)))
Thanks! (There’s no editing though, this is one take haha)
Well the last part about logical inferences is like Gebrish for me. Thanks for this.
Is there a way to contact you via e-mail? The address, which is listed on your profile, does not work :(
Kudos .......... very well explained, better than my Uni lecturer.
A good hour long video to help me fall asleep tonight. Magical Voice. Saved!
Thanks! clear and concise
great explanation thank you Trev.
GOD BLESS YOU
A f-ing legend.
i love you😭
i love you
king asf imma use this to study for my final
Good job! You made logic so easy!
Lmao my final is tomorrow
thanks for this buddy boo
thank you so much you saved my life in math today
You're so welcome!
BEAUTIFULLY EXPLAINED
good stuff king trev
life changinggg!
thanks so much!
love you bro
Love you too
OMG!!!!!
🔥🔥🔥🔥