Timeline for De Morgan for Quantifiers Formal Proof: ∀∃-intro and -elim Questions
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2, 2020 at 5:04 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Mar 4, 2020 at 5:01 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Nov 5, 2019 at 4:05 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Jul 8, 2019 at 4:00 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Mar 10, 2019 at 3:02 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Feb 8, 2019 at 2:01 | answer | added | Graham Kemp | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 7, 2019 at 23:08 | comment | added | E... |
I think P(x)might be a typo and what is meant is P(a) where a is an arbitrary constant (note the [a] in that line). P(a) doesn't need a quantifier since a is not a variable. Similarly line 5 should be ~P(a). Does this clarify anything for you?
|
|
| Feb 7, 2019 at 22:23 | history | asked | Kostiantyn Rybnikov | CC BY-SA 4.0 |