Prove the Logical Expression Tautology

Use the laws of logic to show that the following logical expression is a tautology without the truth table: Tautology Logic.

Please subscribe !

More videos on Logical Equivalence:

Play List of Logical Equivalence / Proposition Logic:

►Discrete Mathematics Workbooks:

Show less

[martinvadakara]

Thank you. You helped me more than my boring discrete math teacher.

[boo]

At first I was kind of skeptic because of the video quality but it was very well explained and easy to follow. I'm glad I found this because so far it seems like the best resource for learning Discrete Structures! Thank You!

[PbaTv]

Good stuff. I completely understand the laws the only problem is that I never know when to use what laws

[tintinu]

Thanks man you widen my understand....

[exoluxx]

Thank you very much, this helps me a lot in my assignment

[noacajila]

Thank u for u help, you clarified it a lot

[sben]

Hey- thanks for the vid! What do you think is the best way to learn this material fluently? I wanna glide through this like you!

[instaminox]

I am glad I am doing this one right! but my assignments one are more challenging! ... contingency ...

[RedRebel]

I think what you call the domination law is also called the annulment law.

[Sikk]

After the identity law at (q ^ p) --> q why do you use the implication law and how do you get ~(q ^ p) v q?

[thelilteacup]

at 3:56 you place the negation sign outside the parenthesis. Why is it not inside like in the first step?

[jesserosenthal]

Thank you professor. Really good video I needed this.

[Sakyawirananda]

yo, can yu explain to me the first identity law that you used? how can it get rid of the whole F V ?

[mrveejayofficial]

Negation? Looks like complement property to me for the negation after distributive

[irSpongstar]

How would you use a tautology to show a logical expression is a contradiction? So (P -> Q) <-> ~(~P \/ Q). Prove that is a contradiction using (P \/ ~P) is a tautology.

[bravek]

thank you so much that was so super..but i didnt get why at 1:20 we changed the → to ∨ ??? I mean what is the main point of implication?

[bobtom]

my brain hurts...I don't get it...more specifically the laws and what happens with those laws. Because all my teacher gave me was the laws and that's it...

[bravek]

What is Domination Law? Could you explain please