[Discrete Mathematics] Logic Laws Examples

LIKE AND SHARE THE VIDEO IF IT HELPED!

*--Playlists--*

*--Recommended Textbooks--*

In this video we use logic laws to reduce propositional logic as much as possible.

Hello, welcome to TheTrevTutor. I'm here to help you learn your college courses in an easy, efficient manner. If you like what you see, feel free to subscribe and follow me for updates. If you have any questions, leave them below. I try to answer as many questions as possible. If something isn't quite clear or needs more explanation, I can easily make additional videos to satisfy your need for knowledge and understanding.

[Trevtutor]

It comes with video lectures, text lectures, practice problems, solutions, and a practice final exam!

[JuanDeSouza]

4:49 "I don't know how we call this... whatever, I'll say it's a negation."
The most sincere teacher ever! hahahah

[isaaccastillo]

thnx for these videos. i know they arent very popular, but dont feel that they are helping users, because they are.

[esmaerlefrankie]

my lecturer really leaves it up to us to study for discrete structure so YOU ARE A GOD SENT THANK YOU MAN

[marielkayeorlido]

Hello! I'm taking up Discrete Structures now, and I'm thankful for your videos! Your explanations are easy to understand! Thank you so much!

[nooneg]

At 2:15 theres a mistake, indempodent law is used which states
that :PVP==P, P^P==P
so for P^(P^Q), we arrange it as( P^P)^Q
as due to indempotent law P^P==P, so our conclusion is (P^Q) & next is so on with the video ..Btw thank you sir your videos are lifesaver🤍

[corporalwaffles]

At 2:14, I think it's supposed to be idempotent law

[johnangeloperez]

so can we say that q -> q <=> T is a definition by itself, like if A, then A is always TRUE?

[darwinmanalo]

This is very helpful. Please do some examples (problems and solutions) for Venn Diagram. Thank you :)

[sarkersaadahmed]

3:35 why isnt the first one idempotant law

[shubhamgoswami]

~(p + q) + (~p × q) equivalent to ~p
Prove it by laws
+ For or
x for and
~ for negation

[edberaga]

I don't understand the distribution law with different connectives at 3:38 ... can you explain more...?

[louis]

7:38 the most elegant phi I've ever seen

[SO-oyli]

One question. For the first example step 3,
(p & q) v ((p & q) & not p)

for the second bracket set, since it's pretty associative, can we really just remove the brackets inside and think of it as (p & q & not p) as well?

[christophermalecki]

This video is super helpful. Question, can't you just say that (Q implies Q) is a T?

[Snoopfrogg.]

Do you have any videos on Rules of Inference?

[Ackk]

P v (~p ^ q ) can i use absorb law and the result is ~p . Is that true??

[CURE]

Question; are we allowed to have not p v p, or is this rule strictly for not p and p?

[djswagmac]

At 5:12 can you just use the absorption law for step 4?

[everchann]

what's the definition of the arrow?