Expressing the converse, contra-positive, and inverse of conditional statements
$begingroup$
This problem is from Discrete Mathematics and its Applications
Here is my book's definition on converse, contrapositive, and inverse
And the common ways to express an implication
For this problem, is it better to translate the conditional statements that are not in the "if p, q form" to that form? That way everything will be consistent.
Going off the translation approach
27a. This conditional statement is already in the "if p, q form", so I don't have to do any translation
- Converse - q -> p. If I ski tomorrow, it will snow today.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If I don't ski tomorrow, it will not snow today
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If it doesn't snow today, I will not ski tomorrow.
27b. This conditional statement is in the "q whenever p" form so I translated that to "If there is going to be a quiz, I will come to class.
- Converse - q -> p. If I come to class, there is going to be a quiz.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If I don't come to class there is not going to be a quiz.
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If there is not going to be a quiz, I will not come to class.
27c. This conditional statement is in the p only if form, so I translated it to "if a positive integer is a prime, it has no divisors other than 1 and itself.
- Converse - q -> p. If a positive integer has no divisors other than 1 and itself, it is prime.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If a positive integer has divisors other than 1 and itself, it is not prime.
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If a positive integer is not prime, it has divisors other than 1 and itself.
Does look right/ sound logically coherent. Is it a good strategy to convert form to if p, q or is that not necessary?
discrete-mathematics logic propositional-calculus solution-verification
asked Jan 25 '15 at 22:08
committedandroidercommittedandroider
97341737
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This problem is from Discrete Mathematics and its Applications
Here is my book's definition on converse, contrapositive, and inverse
And the common ways to express an implication
For this problem, is it better to translate the conditional statements that are not in the "if p, q form" to that form? That way everything will be consistent.
Going off the translation approach
27a. This conditional statement is already in the "if p, q form", so I don't have to do any translation
- Converse - q -> p. If I ski tomorrow, it will snow today.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If I don't ski tomorrow, it will not snow today
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If it doesn't snow today, I will not ski tomorrow.
27b. This conditional statement is in the "q whenever p" form so I translated that to "If there is going to be a quiz, I will come to class.
- Converse - q -> p. If I come to class, there is going to be a quiz.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If I don't come to class there is not going to be a quiz.
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If there is not going to be a quiz, I will not come to class.
27c. This conditional statement is in the p only if form, so I translated it to "if a positive integer is a prime, it has no divisors other than 1 and itself.
- Converse - q -> p. If a positive integer has no divisors other than 1 and itself, it is prime.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If a positive integer has divisors other than 1 and itself, it is not prime.
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If a positive integer is not prime, it has divisors other than 1 and itself.
Does look right/ sound logically coherent. Is it a good strategy to convert form to if p, q or is that not necessary?
discrete-mathematics logic propositional-calculus solution-verification
asked Jan 25 '15 at 22:08
committedandroidercommittedandroider
97341737
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This problem is from Discrete Mathematics and its Applications
Here is my book's definition on converse, contrapositive, and inverse
And the common ways to express an implication
For this problem, is it better to translate the conditional statements that are not in the "if p, q form" to that form? That way everything will be consistent.
Going off the translation approach
27a. This conditional statement is already in the "if p, q form", so I don't have to do any translation
- Converse - q -> p. If I ski tomorrow, it will snow today.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If I don't ski tomorrow, it will not snow today
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If it doesn't snow today, I will not ski tomorrow.
27b. This conditional statement is in the "q whenever p" form so I translated that to "If there is going to be a quiz, I will come to class.
- Converse - q -> p. If I come to class, there is going to be a quiz.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If I don't come to class there is not going to be a quiz.
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If there is not going to be a quiz, I will not come to class.
27c. This conditional statement is in the p only if form, so I translated it to "if a positive integer is a prime, it has no divisors other than 1 and itself.
- Converse - q -> p. If a positive integer has no divisors other than 1 and itself, it is prime.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If a positive integer has divisors other than 1 and itself, it is not prime.
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If a positive integer is not prime, it has divisors other than 1 and itself.
Does look right/ sound logically coherent. Is it a good strategy to convert form to if p, q or is that not necessary?
discrete-mathematics logic propositional-calculus solution-verification
asked Jan 25 '15 at 22:08
committedandroidercommittedandroider
97341737
$endgroup$
This problem is from Discrete Mathematics and its Applications
Here is my book's definition on converse, contrapositive, and inverse
And the common ways to express an implication
For this problem, is it better to translate the conditional statements that are not in the "if p, q form" to that form? That way everything will be consistent.
Going off the translation approach
27a. This conditional statement is already in the "if p, q form", so I don't have to do any translation
- Converse - q -> p. If I ski tomorrow, it will snow today.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If I don't ski tomorrow, it will not snow today
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If it doesn't snow today, I will not ski tomorrow.
27b. This conditional statement is in the "q whenever p" form so I translated that to "If there is going to be a quiz, I will come to class.
- Converse - q -> p. If I come to class, there is going to be a quiz.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If I don't come to class there is not going to be a quiz.
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If there is not going to be a quiz, I will not come to class.
27c. This conditional statement is in the p only if form, so I translated it to "if a positive integer is a prime, it has no divisors other than 1 and itself.
- Converse - q -> p. If a positive integer has no divisors other than 1 and itself, it is prime.
- Contrapositive - ~q -> ~p. If a positive integer has divisors other than 1 and itself, it is not prime.
- Inverse - ~p -> ~q. If a positive integer is not prime, it has divisors other than 1 and itself.
Does look right/ sound logically coherent. Is it a good strategy to convert form to if p, q or is that not necessary?
discrete-mathematics logic propositional-calculus solution-verification
discrete-mathematics logic propositional-calculus solution-verification
asked Jan 25 '15 at 22:08
committedandroidercommittedandroider
97341737
asked Jan 25 '15 at 22:08
committedandroidercommittedandroider
97341737
edited Jan 26 '15 at 0:06
user147263
asked Jan 25 '15 at 22:08
committedandroidercommittedandroider
97341737
asked Jan 25 '15 at 22:08
committedandroidercommittedandroider
97341737
asked Jan 25 '15 at 22:08
committedandroidercommittedandroider
97341737
97341737
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
- You aren't entirely correct in your translations. In your example of 27, you keep "will" in the same part of the sentence, but they should be part of the proposition that you're moving around. I know, this seems small and pedantic, but to be completely concise and accurate, it's an important detail. I will mention, however, that your translation is probably acceptable for a discrete mathematics course, but in a pure logic course it wouldn't be appropriate.
$p$ = "It snows today"
$q$ = "I will ski tomorrow"
So 27a converse should look like "If I will skill tomorrow, then it snows today."
28 and 29 look to be just fine.
answered Jan 25 '15 at 22:49
ProbablyNotYourProfessorProbablyNotYourProfessor
516
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
So I skill tomorrow isn't the same as I will ski tomorrow? To me they express the same thing an action(skiing) that will happen tomorrow.
$endgroup$
– committedandroider
Jan 28 '15 at 20:32
$begingroup$
@committedandroider I shall interpret "I ski" as having present tense to it. Thus, saying "I ski tomorrow" could perhaps serve as a shorthand for "I ski today and I will ski tomorrow." That differs from saying "I will ski tomorrow." (this isn't meant to imply anything about how people use a phrase like "I ski tomorrow".)
$endgroup$
– Doug Spoonwood
Sep 25 '16 at 14:51
$begingroup$
"If I will ski tomorrow, then it snows today" is not grammatical.
$endgroup$
– Fabio Somenzi
Jan 6 at 4:19
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1119514%2fexpressing-the-converse-contra-positive-and-inverse-of-conditional-statements%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
- You aren't entirely correct in your translations. In your example of 27, you keep "will" in the same part of the sentence, but they should be part of the proposition that you're moving around. I know, this seems small and pedantic, but to be completely concise and accurate, it's an important detail. I will mention, however, that your translation is probably acceptable for a discrete mathematics course, but in a pure logic course it wouldn't be appropriate.
$p$ = "It snows today"
$q$ = "I will ski tomorrow"
So 27a converse should look like "If I will skill tomorrow, then it snows today."
28 and 29 look to be just fine.
answered Jan 25 '15 at 22:49
ProbablyNotYourProfessorProbablyNotYourProfessor
516
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
So I skill tomorrow isn't the same as I will ski tomorrow? To me they express the same thing an action(skiing) that will happen tomorrow.
$endgroup$
– committedandroider
Jan 28 '15 at 20:32
$begingroup$
@committedandroider I shall interpret "I ski" as having present tense to it. Thus, saying "I ski tomorrow" could perhaps serve as a shorthand for "I ski today and I will ski tomorrow." That differs from saying "I will ski tomorrow." (this isn't meant to imply anything about how people use a phrase like "I ski tomorrow".)
$endgroup$
– Doug Spoonwood
Sep 25 '16 at 14:51
$begingroup$
"If I will ski tomorrow, then it snows today" is not grammatical.
$endgroup$
– Fabio Somenzi
Jan 6 at 4:19
add a comment |
$begingroup$
- You aren't entirely correct in your translations. In your example of 27, you keep "will" in the same part of the sentence, but they should be part of the proposition that you're moving around. I know, this seems small and pedantic, but to be completely concise and accurate, it's an important detail. I will mention, however, that your translation is probably acceptable for a discrete mathematics course, but in a pure logic course it wouldn't be appropriate.
$p$ = "It snows today"
$q$ = "I will ski tomorrow"
So 27a converse should look like "If I will skill tomorrow, then it snows today."
28 and 29 look to be just fine.
answered Jan 25 '15 at 22:49
ProbablyNotYourProfessorProbablyNotYourProfessor
516
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
So I skill tomorrow isn't the same as I will ski tomorrow? To me they express the same thing an action(skiing) that will happen tomorrow.
$endgroup$
– committedandroider
Jan 28 '15 at 20:32
$begingroup$
@committedandroider I shall interpret "I ski" as having present tense to it. Thus, saying "I ski tomorrow" could perhaps serve as a shorthand for "I ski today and I will ski tomorrow." That differs from saying "I will ski tomorrow." (this isn't meant to imply anything about how people use a phrase like "I ski tomorrow".)
$endgroup$
– Doug Spoonwood
Sep 25 '16 at 14:51
$begingroup$
"If I will ski tomorrow, then it snows today" is not grammatical.
$endgroup$
– Fabio Somenzi
Jan 6 at 4:19
add a comment |
$begingroup$
- You aren't entirely correct in your translations. In your example of 27, you keep "will" in the same part of the sentence, but they should be part of the proposition that you're moving around. I know, this seems small and pedantic, but to be completely concise and accurate, it's an important detail. I will mention, however, that your translation is probably acceptable for a discrete mathematics course, but in a pure logic course it wouldn't be appropriate.
$p$ = "It snows today"
$q$ = "I will ski tomorrow"
So 27a converse should look like "If I will skill tomorrow, then it snows today."
28 and 29 look to be just fine.
answered Jan 25 '15 at 22:49
ProbablyNotYourProfessorProbablyNotYourProfessor
516
$endgroup$
- You aren't entirely correct in your translations. In your example of 27, you keep "will" in the same part of the sentence, but they should be part of the proposition that you're moving around. I know, this seems small and pedantic, but to be completely concise and accurate, it's an important detail. I will mention, however, that your translation is probably acceptable for a discrete mathematics course, but in a pure logic course it wouldn't be appropriate.
$p$ = "It snows today"
$q$ = "I will ski tomorrow"
So 27a converse should look like "If I will skill tomorrow, then it snows today."
28 and 29 look to be just fine.
answered Jan 25 '15 at 22:49
ProbablyNotYourProfessorProbablyNotYourProfessor
516
answered Jan 25 '15 at 22:49
ProbablyNotYourProfessorProbablyNotYourProfessor
516
answered Jan 25 '15 at 22:49
ProbablyNotYourProfessorProbablyNotYourProfessor
516
answered Jan 25 '15 at 22:49
ProbablyNotYourProfessorProbablyNotYourProfessor
516
516
$begingroup$
So I skill tomorrow isn't the same as I will ski tomorrow? To me they express the same thing an action(skiing) that will happen tomorrow.
$endgroup$
– committedandroider
Jan 28 '15 at 20:32
$begingroup$
@committedandroider I shall interpret "I ski" as having present tense to it. Thus, saying "I ski tomorrow" could perhaps serve as a shorthand for "I ski today and I will ski tomorrow." That differs from saying "I will ski tomorrow." (this isn't meant to imply anything about how people use a phrase like "I ski tomorrow".)
$endgroup$
– Doug Spoonwood
Sep 25 '16 at 14:51
$begingroup$
"If I will ski tomorrow, then it snows today" is not grammatical.
$endgroup$
– Fabio Somenzi
Jan 6 at 4:19
add a comment |
$begingroup$
So I skill tomorrow isn't the same as I will ski tomorrow? To me they express the same thing an action(skiing) that will happen tomorrow.
$endgroup$
– committedandroider
Jan 28 '15 at 20:32
$begingroup$
@committedandroider I shall interpret "I ski" as having present tense to it. Thus, saying "I ski tomorrow" could perhaps serve as a shorthand for "I ski today and I will ski tomorrow." That differs from saying "I will ski tomorrow." (this isn't meant to imply anything about how people use a phrase like "I ski tomorrow".)
$endgroup$
– Doug Spoonwood
Sep 25 '16 at 14:51
$begingroup$
"If I will ski tomorrow, then it snows today" is not grammatical.
$endgroup$
– Fabio Somenzi
Jan 6 at 4:19
$begingroup$
So I skill tomorrow isn't the same as I will ski tomorrow? To me they express the same thing an action(skiing) that will happen tomorrow.
$endgroup$
– committedandroider
Jan 28 '15 at 20:32
$begingroup$
So I skill tomorrow isn't the same as I will ski tomorrow? To me they express the same thing an action(skiing) that will happen tomorrow.
$endgroup$
– committedandroider
Jan 28 '15 at 20:32
$begingroup$
@committedandroider I shall interpret "I ski" as having present tense to it. Thus, saying "I ski tomorrow" could perhaps serve as a shorthand for "I ski today and I will ski tomorrow." That differs from saying "I will ski tomorrow." (this isn't meant to imply anything about how people use a phrase like "I ski tomorrow".)
$endgroup$
– Doug Spoonwood
Sep 25 '16 at 14:51
$begingroup$
@committedandroider I shall interpret "I ski" as having present tense to it. Thus, saying "I ski tomorrow" could perhaps serve as a shorthand for "I ski today and I will ski tomorrow." That differs from saying "I will ski tomorrow." (this isn't meant to imply anything about how people use a phrase like "I ski tomorrow".)
$endgroup$
– Doug Spoonwood
Sep 25 '16 at 14:51
$begingroup$
"If I will ski tomorrow, then it snows today" is not grammatical.
$endgroup$
– Fabio Somenzi
Jan 6 at 4:19
$begingroup$
"If I will ski tomorrow, then it snows today" is not grammatical.
$endgroup$
– Fabio Somenzi
Jan 6 at 4:19
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1119514%2fexpressing-the-converse-contra-positive-and-inverse-of-conditional-statements%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
