3.2.1 Natural Deduction - Basic Proofs

Basic proofs using basic rules are demonstrated.

[@NyaLexar]

im crying i have a midterm on this and my teacher explains the subject with complicated words and this made it so much easier to understand tysm

[@morgard211]

This is extremely useful. Thank you!

[@elijahsawyer513]

thank you for the help. great video

[@chocolatechip4777]

Thanks for the video, my study material was very unclear to me, but now I completely get it.

[@chippynotty2984]

Great video cheers

[@noaag]

Thank you!!! I am gonna do so well on this test.
Note: I like how you refer to logical proofs as "The Game". Like it's the rap game. Haha.

[@csperi-peri2447]

Great video!

[@dostonbekmatyakubov1898]

Many thanks, nice explanation

[@mrkurdo5421]

Thank you!

[@mitsakosclasher739]

Τhank you!!

[@mert_kaan_yilmaz]

Thank you soo much

[@DigitalGnosis]

Thanks for the video - out of interest why does anyone use natural deduction over the tableax method?

[@hanaibrahim1563]

Thank you :) very easy to follow!

[@KianBrose]

Still fail to see how natural deduction or discrete math is useful in any aspect of programming or why it's required in programming courses, asked a couple dozen programmers if they have ever used it they all said no

[@Karlthegreat100]

Proofs are not that important in programming. But like Dijkstra said, "CS is to computers like Astronomy is to telescopes". Programming is a by-product of CS. CS and math are where proofs are important. Such as proving whether your program terminates, whether your program gives the correct output, what's the time complexity of your program, or even something in Theoretical CS like whether some algorithm is in P or in NP.

[@Addiwasabi]

shouts out steers-mccrum

[@marijanamijic5007]

I don't understan how you used (qVr) to get ~s didn't you suposed to use ~(qVr) so you can apply Modus tollens and get ~s

[@ramidhouib1422]

excellent ! i mean why useless youtubers are famous and something as clear asthis is buried :/

[@aryan_kode]

bhaskar ne bola ye padh lo

[@renzbandoquillo8313]

How to prove this
Prove: (M/W
1.(A->~A)
2.(A->W)
3.(~A->M)
And
Prove: (X/Z)
1. [(X/Z) → ~K]
2. [W → (C/~P)]
3. [(C/~P) → (X&W)]
4. { ~[~W / ~(X/Z)] / (X&~Z)}
5. {~ (X&W) / ~[(X/Z) & ~K]}