Proving logical equivalence involving the biconditional

Step by step description of exercise 16 from our text.
Using key logical equivlances we will show p iff q is logically equivalent to (p AND q) OR (NOT p AND NOT q)

[@DiscoInTheNunnery]

Thanks for making this video public! I'm taking a similar course at the University of Washington and this really helped demystify writing proofs involving biconditionals for me.

[@DarthLang]

You are a saint of a woman. Thank you sooooo much. I have been working this problem for two days now and you have helped me through the end.

[@chidedneck]

You made it seem like nothing, when I was feeling like this was so insurmountable. Your teaching style was very reassuring, and I super super appreciate your help at a tough time.

[@harunaadoga]

nicely done....well explained, thanks

[@misstoastee1918]

Wow. You are so amazing. Thank you ! ^^

[@zackthebest629]

thank u from north africa thank uuuuuu

[@ClusiveC]

Helped a lot, thank you.

[@josehurtado9200]

Hi Kailee! Could you make a video proving all the statements in table 8 (logical equivalences involving biconditional statements) or direct me to resources on their full proofs? I'm trying to prove the last equivalence statement where the negation of a biconditional is equivalent to p being biconditional to the negation of q. Thanks!

[@jewelmithun3889]

thank u so much mam :)
it helped a lot

[@Doctor.Fortnite]

Thank you. That was so helpful :)

[@humamsmeirat2440]

Thankkk youuu 👌👌👌

[@liz-nj2zv]

Thanks you ver much !!!

[@shohanurrahman1920]

Love you... Awesome

[@S0ll]

Hi ,,,
Can I ask you please how can I understand the logical equivalences involving conditional statements, it's very hard to memorize all the methods T~T

[@zombiehd6675]

thx ..

[@auxcord8919]

Hello, How would I proof.
~U
(A^U)~R
~(~Rv~A)
Derive not U from the following premises. Thanks to anyone who can help.