Math Problem Statement

Prove that the following statement formula is a tautology: (((P ∨ Q) → R) ∨ ¬P) → (Q → R)

Solution

The problem asks to prove that the given logical statement is a tautology, meaning it is always true regardless of the truth values of its variables. The formula from the image is:

(((PQ)R)(¬P))(QR)(((P \vee Q) \rightarrow R) \vee (\neg P)) \rightarrow (Q \rightarrow R)

To prove this is a tautology, we can follow a truth table approach or logical equivalence. Let's break this down:

Step 1: Simplify the Expression

We will break the formula into smaller components and determine if the logical equivalences hold:

  • PQP \vee Q: This is the logical "or" between PP and QQ.
  • (PQ)R(P \vee Q) \rightarrow R: The implication that if PP or QQ is true, then RR must be true.
  • ¬P\neg P: The negation of PP.
  • ((PQ)R)(¬P)((P \vee Q) \rightarrow R) \vee (\neg P): This states that either the implication from (PQ)R(P \vee Q) \rightarrow R is true or ¬P\neg P is true.
  • QRQ \rightarrow R: This is a simple implication between QQ and RR.
  • Finally, the overall expression is an implication: (((PQ)R)(¬P))(QR)(((P \vee Q) \rightarrow R) \vee (\neg P)) \rightarrow (Q \rightarrow R).

Step 2: Create the Truth Table

We will now construct a truth table with all possible truth values for PP, QQ, and RR, and evaluate the expression step by step.

Let me calculate this for you.Here is the truth table for the expression:

(((PQ)R)(¬P))(QR)(((P \vee Q) \rightarrow R) \vee (\neg P)) \rightarrow (Q \rightarrow R)

PPQQRR(((PQ)R)¬P)(QR)(((P \vee Q) \rightarrow R) \vee \neg P) \rightarrow (Q \rightarrow R)
FalseFalseFalseTrue
FalseFalseTrueTrue
FalseTrueFalseFalse
FalseTrueTrueTrue
TrueFalseFalseTrue
TrueFalseTrueTrue
TrueTrueFalseTrue
TrueTrueTrueTrue

From the table, we can see that the expression evaluates to True in all but one case. Since one case produces False, the statement is not a tautology.

Do you want any clarifications on this result?

Here are 5 follow-up questions to consider:

  1. What is a counterexample for this expression?
  2. How can truth tables be used to analyze other logical expressions?
  3. Can De Morgan's laws help simplify parts of this logical expression?
  4. How would changing the expression to PRP \rightarrow R affect the result?
  5. How can you interpret implications in formal logic in practical reasoning?

Tip: When working with logical implications, remember that PQP \rightarrow Q is equivalent to ¬PQ\neg P \vee Q.

Ask a new question for Free

By Image

Drop file here or Click Here to upload

Math Problem Analysis

Mathematical Concepts

Propositional Logic
Tautology
Logical Equivalences

Formulas

Implication (P → Q)
Disjunction (P ∨ Q)
Negation (¬P)

Theorems

Truth Table
Tautology Definition

Suitable Grade Level

College-level Logic