Problem_Set_5_solutions

Problem_Set_5_solutions - quantifier, so we cant add...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
V83.0070 Logic Spring 2008 Matt Kotzen Problem Set 5 Solutions 7.3E: 2b) Bct 2d) Bds 2f) (( Bak Bbk) ( Bck Bdk)) Bek 2h) Atp Ath 2j) Lbp Ldp 2l) (Tbc Tca) ( Tbe & Tce) 2n) ((Tab & Tac) (Tad Tae)) 2p) Tcb Aca 7.4E: 1b) ( x)Bx 1d) ( x) Bx 1f) ( x)Bx ( x)Rx 1h) ( x)Bx ( x)Rx 1j) ( x)Bx ( x)Rx 3b) ( x)Px Pj 3d) ( x)Px Pr 3f) ( x)Px ( x)Px 3h) ( Pj ( x)Px) (Pj ( x)Px) 3j) ( x)Sx ( x)Px 7.5E: 1b) No. “(x)” is missing a quantifier. 1d) No. “ ” is the existential quantifier, not “E” 1f) No. “Faa” doesn’t have any unbound x’s. 1h) No. The x’s in “Px” and “Gx” were already within the scope of the universal
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: quantifier, so we cant add another x-quantifier 1j) Yes. Sentence, since all variables are bound. 1l) Yes. Sentence, since all variables are bound. 1n) No. Quantifiers have to range over variables, not constants. 1p) No. The z in Gaz was already bound by the existential quantifier, so we cant add another z-quantifier. 7.7E: 2b) ( x)(Lx Fx) 2d) ( x)(Lx & Cxd) 2f) ( x)((Lx & Fx) Bx) 2h) ( x)(Lx & Cxd) & ( x)(Tx & Cxd) 2j) ( x)[((Lx Tx) & Fx) Bx] 2l) Bd & ( x)[((Fx&Lx) (Fx&Tx)) Bx] 2n) ( x)(Lx (Fx Cdx)) 2p) Fd ( x)(Lx Tx)...
View Full Document

Page1 / 2

Problem_Set_5_solutions - quantifier, so we cant add...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online