Thank you so much for this video. Tomorrow I have an exam and I was supper nervous. And your video just save me😊 Keep up the good work✨ You should get a job in my college🥺
Many thanks for this help. I kept keeping stuck with this exercise, it is nice to see now how to work my way out of these situations. I appreciate this.
Thanks for this video am sitting fory exams on 21 july which is next week 2022 and i was nervous about propositoons proofs and you have saved me.Please continue to make more videos may GOD BLESS YOU🙏🙏
Hi Jason thanks for this explanation. It is very clear. I do know if you still read comments but I want to ask anyone here but I wonder if someone can explain the conditional part. The negation of the left and right. I got stuck here and I found your vid!
So. The absorption laws are basically a way of simplifying "or" and and" statements. If q is some statement, and we have q OR F, let's look at this. If q is F, then we have F or F, which is F. If q is T then we have T or F which is T. Therefkrez the truth value of the compound statement is the same as the truth value of q.. so that means q OR F is equivalent to q.
That is an equivalence that is established early on with truth tables. if you do the truth tables for not p or q and the truth table for p -> q, you get the same set of outputs, which means they are logically equivalent, which means they can be used interchangeably. When showing two statements are equivalent, you typically want to break it down into ands, ors, and nots. I hope this helps!.
That is from the logical equivalence with p -> q. It is equivalent to -p or q. So when rewriting an implication, negate the statement to the left of the arrow, then or, then whatever is on the right side of the arrow.
Who tf invented this
yeah bro, kinda annoying
I swear to god hella annoying
A psychotic mathematician
No you're unto something
Sir Boolean of house Algae bra
Awesome video. Easy-to-follow and great explanation
Thank you so much for this video. Tomorrow I have an exam and I was supper nervous. And your video just save me😊
Keep up the good work✨
You should get a job in my college🥺
Thank you so much !!! I am very happy that this helped... let me know if there is anything else I can post for you! All the best in your studies :)
Many thanks for this help. I kept keeping stuck with this exercise, it is nice to see now how to work my way out of these situations. I appreciate this.
Rodriguez Helen Williams Richard Taylor Ronald
why do we have professors when people like u exist.....
White Sharon Rodriguez Charles Walker Elizabeth
Lewis Kevin Taylor Amy Gonzalez Scott
Thanks for this video am sitting fory exams on 21 july which is next week 2022 and i was nervous about propositoons proofs and you have saved me.Please continue to make more videos may GOD BLESS YOU🙏🙏
Thank you sir for using this method. I used modus ponens and Modus tollens to solve these types of problems.
Gonzalez Steven Taylor Shirley Lewis Steven
Smith Joseph Moore Amy Walker Paul
Tnxs for this video it helped me too from #Ethiopia
Lopez Michelle Clark Paul Wilson Frank
Allen Maria Lopez Kevin Davis Betty
where can i find more example problems to practice with
Anderson Brenda Walker Ronald Taylor Paul
Hall Scott Miller Elizabeth Moore Carol
Lee Daniel White Elizabeth Hall Laura
you're a great teacher, thanks Jason
Hi Jason thanks for this explanation. It is very clear. I do know if you still read comments but I want to ask anyone here but I wonder if someone can explain the conditional part. The negation of the left and right. I got stuck here and I found your vid!
Nevermind. I got it. Subbed. Thanks.
can anyone plz explain the 4th and 5th line,,,,absorption law....?😔😔😔
So. The absorption laws are basically a way of simplifying "or" and and" statements.
If q is some statement, and we have q OR F, let's look at this.
If q is F, then we have F or F, which is F.
If q is T then we have T or F which is T.
Therefkrez the truth value of the compound statement is the same as the truth value of q.. so that means q OR F is equivalent to q.
this is the best vid i found i actually understood finally
Thanks for this video. I liked this explanation a lot! It's amazing!
Thank you from india💖😃
merci beaucoup
{~p^(p implies q)} implies ~q how can we solve this?
You could use a truth table, that might be very straightforward since you only have p and q to deal with - but be warned - this one isn't a tautology!
thank you
this made the concept click in my brain!! easy to follow and all steps explained thank you so much
Thanks
Wait a minute? Try test it on a truth table!
You totally can! Truth tables can always be used. This is just another way using identities :)
hot
don't keep your mac plugged in Jason. Good video however.
Thank you so much.... This was very helpful
I am super glad that you found this helpful! All the best and let me know if there's anything else you want to see!
it's just me or this guy has the same voice with organic chemistry tutor's guy's voice ???
btw thank u sm for the clear explanation :3
thank you, man!!! THAT'S SIMPLE AND GREAT
Thanks for ur amazing video
Thank you for the wonderful video.
How to determine example of tautology you use, using Truth to table☘️
If it was q-->p do we say it's the same as p-->q just found out it's going to be ~q ٧ p
That is correct!!!!
Thank you so much sir🕒🕞
thank you so much oh my gosh ily ily ily
show that the conditional statement (p∨q)∧(¬p∨r)⇒(q∨r) is tautology without using truth tables , Sir can you please solve this question, its urgent
try to find a contradicion using the semantic tableaux
best explanation ever
man you are a lifesaver , i don't know what to say
Thank you from Houston
Thank you! I'm watching this just before doing a quiz on this section
thank you so much
nice
For a long search. This is the best I've ever seen. You're the magic.
Jason, thank you so much for this video!!! Helped a lot with my HW
This was both fun and informative!
Thank you!!!
But how to get p implies a equals to not p or q
That is an equivalence that is established early on with truth tables. if you do the truth tables for not p or q and the truth table for p -> q, you get the same set of outputs, which means they are logically equivalent, which means they can be used interchangeably. When showing two statements are equivalent, you typically want to break it down into ands, ors, and nots. I hope this helps!.
Hi! What is the software or app that you are using to sketch this?
That is Notability for the Ipad!! Such a great app. I just can't use anything else.
Thanks
Love you work
ttthhhhhaaannkksss yyoyoouuuu
clear example, Thank you
Thanks for a wonderful video.
Thank YOU for taking the time to write your wonderful comments :)
Thanks!
4:11 yo where did you get the outside negation
That is from the logical equivalence with p -> q. It is equivalent to -p or q. So when rewriting an implication, negate the statement to the left of the arrow, then or, then whatever is on the right side of the arrow.
@@jasonmalozzi7962 ahhh I see, kudos to you sir! vid has been so long but you still reply Thanks!
Thank you so much, You were really helpful.
thank you for this video, it helps me to answer my activity. 💗
I am glad this was helpful !!! Let me know if I can make more videos to help!
I am so glad this helped you ! Good luck on your studies ;)
thank youuuu
can i have your email i want to share with you a question