At Westonci.ca, we make it easy to get the answers you need from a community of informed and experienced contributors. Explore comprehensive solutions to your questions from a wide range of professionals on our user-friendly platform. Our platform provides a seamless experience for finding reliable answers from a network of experienced professionals.
Sagot :
To determine which of the expressions is equivalent to [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex] (which states "p or q"), let's analyze each of the given options in detail:
Option A: [tex]\( \neg p \rightarrow q \)[/tex]
To understand this, recall that the implication [tex]\( \neg p \rightarrow q \)[/tex] can be rewritten as [tex]\( \neg(\neg p) \vee q \)[/tex] using logical equivalences. Simplifying [tex]\( \neg(\neg p) \)[/tex] gives us [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex]. Therefore, [tex]\( \neg p \rightarrow q \)[/tex] is indeed equivalent to [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex].
Option B: [tex]\( \neg(\neg p \vee \neg q) \)[/tex]
This is the negation of the disjunction [tex]\( \neg p \vee \neg q \)[/tex]. According to De Morgan's laws, [tex]\( \neg(\neg p \vee \neg q) \)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\( p \wedge q \)[/tex] (the conjunction "p and q"), which is logically different from [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex].
Option C: [tex]\( \neg\left(p \wedge q\right) \)[/tex]
According to De Morgan's laws again, [tex]\( \neg(p \wedge q) \)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\( \neg p \vee \neg q \)[/tex]. This is clearly not the same as [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex].
Option D: [tex]\( \neg(p) \)[/tex]
This option is just the negation of [tex]\( p \)[/tex], which is unrelated to [tex]\( q \)[/tex]. Hence, it cannot be equivalent to [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex].
Given these analyses, the expression that is equivalent to [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex] is:
A. [tex]\( \neg p \rightarrow q \)[/tex]
Thus, the correct choice is Option A.
Option A: [tex]\( \neg p \rightarrow q \)[/tex]
To understand this, recall that the implication [tex]\( \neg p \rightarrow q \)[/tex] can be rewritten as [tex]\( \neg(\neg p) \vee q \)[/tex] using logical equivalences. Simplifying [tex]\( \neg(\neg p) \)[/tex] gives us [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex]. Therefore, [tex]\( \neg p \rightarrow q \)[/tex] is indeed equivalent to [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex].
Option B: [tex]\( \neg(\neg p \vee \neg q) \)[/tex]
This is the negation of the disjunction [tex]\( \neg p \vee \neg q \)[/tex]. According to De Morgan's laws, [tex]\( \neg(\neg p \vee \neg q) \)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\( p \wedge q \)[/tex] (the conjunction "p and q"), which is logically different from [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex].
Option C: [tex]\( \neg\left(p \wedge q\right) \)[/tex]
According to De Morgan's laws again, [tex]\( \neg(p \wedge q) \)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\( \neg p \vee \neg q \)[/tex]. This is clearly not the same as [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex].
Option D: [tex]\( \neg(p) \)[/tex]
This option is just the negation of [tex]\( p \)[/tex], which is unrelated to [tex]\( q \)[/tex]. Hence, it cannot be equivalent to [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex].
Given these analyses, the expression that is equivalent to [tex]\( p \vee q \)[/tex] is:
A. [tex]\( \neg p \rightarrow q \)[/tex]
Thus, the correct choice is Option A.
Thanks for using our platform. We're always here to provide accurate and up-to-date answers to all your queries. We hope you found what you were looking for. Feel free to revisit us for more answers and updated information. We're dedicated to helping you find the answers you need at Westonci.ca. Don't hesitate to return for more.