Timeline for In propositional logic how is the negation equivalent?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 1, 2021 at 9:05 | comment | added | pac234 | Ok so its much more like a human readable sentence in theory | |
| Feb 1, 2021 at 8:57 | comment | added | zkutch | Continuation. If you look more closer, on some next step in future, then you'll see, that in truth table such definition of implication gives "strange" behaviour when premise of implication is false: despite of what conclusion is - true or false - whole implication become true. | |
| Feb 1, 2021 at 8:56 | comment | added | zkutch | "then .. if.." becomes, or more exactly, is "not .. or.." - this is one of the most confusing moments in mathematical implication. More human may be sounds "or not .. or..". One example: "if I have money, then I'll buy book" is same with "or I haven't money or I'll buy book". So implication is not set of "or"s inside "if", but "if" itself is "or not .. or..". Continuing.. | |
| Feb 1, 2021 at 8:46 | vote | accept | pac234 | ||
| Feb 1, 2021 at 8:46 | comment | added | pac234 | Thanks this makes a lot of sense and is what I was missing. The only thing still confusing me now is how the OR's are executed, so it is not to be read like a set of OR statements inside an if condition, more like an if else (the final OR being the else)? Or should I not try to liken this to if conditions? | |
| Feb 1, 2021 at 8:37 | history | answered | zkutch | CC BY-SA 4.0 |