Results 1 to 6 of 6
Like Tree2Thanks
  • 1 Post By Plato
  • 1 Post By Deveno

Math Help - Low level, "fun", logic problem (Could this be moved to discrete math, sorry)

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2012
    From
    United States
    Posts
    18

    Low level, "fun", logic problem (Could this be moved to discrete math, sorry)

    Here is the problem:
    "Lest you think logic is only about mathematics here are some sentences from some, at least once, popular songs.

    B(x) : x is a body
    O(x): x is out.
    D(x): x is down
    L(x,y): x loves y.
    x = y: x equals y.
    u = you
    b = my baby
    m = me

    Translate the following using logical connectives:

    a. "Nobody loves you when you are down and out."
    b. "Everybody loves somebody"
    c. "Everybody loves my baby."
    d. "But my baby don't love nobody but me."

    This is a relatively frustrating problem considering we have barely been introduced to the fundamentals of logic. I took a stab at it, and quickly realized that I was just guessing and as a result probably teaching myself an incorrect way of doing it. Here is my attempt at problem a. D(u)\wedge O(u)\rightarrow \neg L(B(x),u)
    Last edited by fogownz; January 28th 2013 at 02:14 PM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    18,386
    Thanks
    1476
    Awards
    1

    Re: Low level, "fun", logic problem (Could this be moved to discrete math, sorry)

    Quote Originally Posted by fogownz View Post
    Here is the problem:
    "Lest you think logic is only about mathematics here are some sentences from some, at least once, popular songs.
    B(x) : x is a body
    O(x): x is out.
    D(x): x is down
    L(x,y): x loves y.
    x = y: x equals y.
    u = you
    b = my baby
    m = me

    Translate the following using logical connectives:
    a. "Nobody loves you when you are down and out."
    b. "Everybody loves somebody"
    c. "Everybody loves my baby."
    d. "But my baby don't love nobody but me."Here is my attempt at problem a. D(u)\wedge O(u)\rightarrow \neg L(B(x),u)

    Frankly, I would prefer that the domain be specified as the set of humans. That would eliminate the need for B(x). But that said, you made a start.

    Try (\forall x)[B(x) \wedge D(u) \wedge O(u) \Rightarrow \neg L(x,u)]

    I really find the predicate B(x) problematic here.
    If we knew that the domain be specified as the set of humans we could shorten that to:
    (\forall x)[D(u) \wedge O(u) \Rightarrow \neg L(x,u)]
    Thanks from fogownz
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Mar 2011
    From
    Tejas
    Posts
    3,150
    Thanks
    591

    Re: Low level, "fun", logic problem (Could this be moved to discrete math, sorry)

    Quote Originally Posted by Plato View Post
    Frankly, I would prefer that the domain be specified as the set of humans. That would eliminate the need for B(x). But that said, you made a start.

    Try (\forall x)[B(x) \wedge D(u) \wedge O(u) \Rightarrow \neg L(x,u)]

    I really find the predicate B(x) problematic here.
    If we knew that the domain be specified as the set of humans we could shorten that to:
    (\forall x)[D(u) \wedge O(u) \Rightarrow \neg L(x,u)]
    just think of body as an undefined term. less sordid that way :P
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2012
    From
    United States
    Posts
    18

    Re: Low level, "fun", logic problem (Could this be moved to discrete math, sorry)

    Thanks for your help Plato. Is it wrong to put an element (right term?) inside an element such as I had in my original answer with L(B(x),u), or was it just not right in that instance?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Mar 2011
    From
    Tejas
    Posts
    3,150
    Thanks
    591

    Re: Low level, "fun", logic problem (Could this be moved to discrete math, sorry)

    you can nest predicates.
    Thanks from fogownz
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    5,417
    Thanks
    718

    Re: Low level, "fun", logic problem (Could this be moved to discrete math, sorry)

    Quote Originally Posted by Deveno View Post
    you can nest predicates.
    No, in first-order logic you cannot nest predicates. You can nest function symbols. Your example has constants but no function symbols, but if we add, say, a two-argument function symbol f, then f(u, f(f(b, u), m)) is a legal term. Terms, however, have to appear as arguments to predicate (or, relation symbols) to form formulas.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: August 6th 2011, 03:00 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: May 9th 2011, 11:52 AM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 24th 2011, 07:01 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 25th 2010, 04:45 AM
  5. logic: expressing "or" in terms of "implies not"
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 29th 2007, 06:55 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum