2018年9月21日 · Let p be "It is Thursday" Let q be "It is raining" p iff q is not true because there exists days where it is Thursday and it is not raining, yet (not p) iff q is also not true because there are days when its Thursday and it does rain.

2020年2月22日 · Clearly, Q and R mean different things.) (4) P iff Q and P iff R satisfy the validity of a logical argument. (For example, let the statement P is "Blue is the color" and Q is "Eyes are part of the body". Since P and Q are tautologies, P iff Q . But it does not satisfy the validity of a logical argument. I think Q and R are equivalent statements ...

2017年2月7日 · Stack Exchange Network. Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

2023年6月22日 · Stack Exchange Network. Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

2021年1月18日 · I need to write $\lnot (p \iff q)$, which, if I understand correctly, is, by definition: $(p \land \lnot q) \lor(\lnot p \land q )$ So, according to me, it should be as follows: Ravi reads Mathematics and not Chemistry or Ravi doesn't read Mathematics and reads Chemistry.

2022年10月22日 · $ p\iff q \\ \equiv (p\implies q) \wedge (q\implies p)$ and is true only when either both p and q are true or both are false. The same can be easily verified using truth table. But I came across a different definition also attached in the snap below : $ p\iff q\\ \equiv 1- |p-q|$

2016年4月1日 · However I say it is True;This is a bi-conditional statement which mean p if and only if q. p implies q and q implies p which means it is true when both are true or both are false. This also means we combine two conditional statements together and the above claim sates that P if and only if q, means (p then q) AND (q then p) is putting or ...

2017年2月12日 · Once again, we see that 'P only if Q' has the same meaning as 'If P then Q'. And (once again) because we translate 'If P then Q' as 'P-→ Q', it follows that we translate 'P only if Q' as 'P-→ Q'. If you're still unconvinced then it's time to beat a dead horse.... Notice first that the sentence 'If P then Q' amounts to the following two claims:

2023年5月23日 · Stack Exchange Network. Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

2015年9月24日 · A. It's P iff Q and P iff R, Q and R can never be true at the same time. I'm under the impression that. B. (P iff Q) and (P iff R) => Q iff R because hypothetical syllogism. Here was my "proof" 1. P iff Q => P if Q and Q if P 2. P iff R => P if R and R if P 3. P if Q and R if P => R if Q 4. P if R and Q if P => Q if R 5. R if Q and Q if R => Q ...