Logical Equivalence Without Truth Tables

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ธ.ค. 2018
  • Prove Logical Equivalence
    (p and (p or not r or q)) or ((q and r) or (q and not r)) = not p imply q
    Please subscribe for more videos and updates !
    More videos on Logical Equivalence:
    (0) Logical Equivalence: • Prove Logical Equivale...
    (1) Tautology: • Truth Table Tautology ...
    (2) Tautology: • Prove the Logical Expr...
    (3) Contradiction: • Logical Equivalence Co...
    (4) Laws: • Laws Of Logical Equiva...
    (5) Logical Equivalence Using Laws: • Logical Equivalence Wi...
    Play List of Logical Equivalence / Proposition Logic:
    • Logical Equivalence Co...
    ►Website: everythingcomputerscience.com/
    ►Support this channel on Patreon: / randerson112358
    ►Support this channel for FREE by doing your Amazon shopping through this link (bookmark it!): www.amazon.com/?tag=randerson1...
    Resources:
    courses.engr.illinois.edu/cs1...
    integral-table.com/downloads/l...

ความคิดเห็น • 12

  • @PbaTv7
    @PbaTv7 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Thanks alot! I totally understand the application of laws thanks to your vids. Im probably still failing my test tomorrow cause I just dont know when to use what rules at what time but your vids really helped so thanks

  • @jallison1289
    @jallison1289 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you so much. I never knew just how deep the manipulation goes to get the out come we need. Really appreciate your video.

  • @dantemix
    @dantemix 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thank you very much. That really helped a lot.
    😁😁

    • @randerson112358
      @randerson112358  5 ปีที่แล้ว

      That's great! I'm glad this video was helpful.

  • @abdulbasitimtiaz
    @abdulbasitimtiaz 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    thanks helpful

  • @aishwaryamadke6148
    @aishwaryamadke6148 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you sir

  • @beinformednow07
    @beinformednow07 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    3rd step negation law

  • @ashuashwini8688
    @ashuashwini8688 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you so much

  • @GauravSharma-wz6sg
    @GauravSharma-wz6sg 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    That was really nice explanation. Kindly make videos in higher quality if possible. I have a little question : p AND [ (p OR q) OR (p OR r)] is equivalent to p. I don't even know if the question itself is correct, could you please give me the solution.

    • @jallison1289
      @jallison1289 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      The quality is just fine. Appreciate his effort and willingness to share his knowledge with us. Don't sound ungrateful. Sheesh.

  • @superbo9y36
    @superbo9y36 ปีที่แล้ว

    bro is smart