1 Dec
2017
1 Dec
'17
8:52 p.m.
Yes, ((!p) or q) is what I meant by p --> q. Jim On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Tom Karzes <karzes@sonic.net> wrote:
I assumed the intended interpretation of (a --> b) was ((!a) or b).
Tom
Dan Asimov writes:
If the arrows are taken as implication, as in the predicate calculus, then Jim's question seems to make good sense to me.
(But the question can of course be asked in general with other meanings assigned to the arrows.)
—Dan
-----
Do all the Catalan-many parenthesizations of p_1 --> p_2 --> ... --> p_n yield distinct Boolean functions?
That doesn't quite parse. ... -----
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun