in Mathematical Logic edited by
2,320 views
0 votes
0 votes

Consider following first order logic

$\forall x ( \exists y R( x, y ) )$ is equivalent to

1) $\exists y ( \exists x R( x, y ) )$

2) $\exists y ( \forall x R( x, y ) )$

3) $\forall y ( \exists x R( x, y ) )$

4) $\neg \exists x ( \forall y \neg R(x,y) )$

Note: Not sure in the question was it equivalent to or which of these are implied by 

in Mathematical Logic edited by
by
2.3k views

1 comment

4) is straight forward. My doubt is can 1 is also be the ans?
0
0

3 Answers

2 votes
2 votes
let x=(4,6,8) y=(2,3,16) R(x,y) means x divide by y

 ∀x (∃y R(x, y))= means every x divide by some y which is hold true in our assumption (here 2 divide every x)

∃y (∃x R(x, y))= means some y divide by some x which is also hold true(here  16 divide by  4 or 8)
0 votes
0 votes
I think it was implied by.
1 and 4.

4 Comments

edited by
Actually I was on 2nd session......I just solved it because I want to learn.........:-)
0
0
yes it seems to be 4
0
0
Please explain why Option 1 is write?
0
0
0 votes
0 votes
straightforward 4 is equivalent
Also, option_2 implies the given statement., because if there is at least one y related to every x, conversely for all x there will obviously be some y.

Related questions

1 vote
1 vote
1 answer
2
Quick search syntax
tags tag:apple
author user:martin
title title:apple
content content:apple
exclude -tag:apple
force match +apple
views views:100
score score:10
answers answers:2
is accepted isaccepted:true
is closed isclosed:true