Analyzing the Setup
Welcome, future engineer! Today, we are going to step into the shoes of a logic detective. We have a mystery: a complex logical proposition that evaluates to FALSE, and we need to uncover the hidden truth values of our variables, p and q.
This isn't just about solving a problem; it's about understanding the fundamental architecture of reasoning.
The Crime Scene
The False Implication
We are given the condition that p→((∼p)∨q) is FALSE. In the world of logic, an implication A→B is a very specific structure.
It is only FALSE in one unique, catastrophic scenario: when the premise A is TRUE, and the conclusion B is FALSE. If the premise were FALSE, the implication would be vacuously TRUE.
So, we immediately know two things:
1. p must be TRUE.
2. The entire expression ((∼p)∨q) must be FALSE.
The Deduction
Now, let's look at our second piece of evidence: ((∼p)∨q)=FALSE. We already deduced that p is TRUE, which means its negation, ∼p, is FALSE.
Now we have an OR statement: (FALSE∨q)=FALSE. For an OR operation to be FALSE, both components must be FALSE.
Since ∼p is already FALSE, the only way for this statement to be FALSE is if q is also FALSE. We have cracked the case: p is TRUE and q is FALSE.
Evaluating the Propositions
Now that we have our suspects, p=TRUE and q=FALSE, let's test our propositions.
First, consider P1:∼(p→∼q). Substituting our values, we get ∼q=∼(FALSE)=TRUE.
So, P1 becomes ∼(TRUE→TRUE). Since TRUE→TRUE is TRUE, the negation makes P1 FALSE.
Finally, let's look at P2:(p∧∼q)∧((∼p)∨q). Substituting our values: (p∧∼q) becomes (TRUE∧TRUE), which is TRUE.
The second part, ((∼p)∨q), becomes (FALSE∨FALSE), which is FALSE. So, P2 is TRUE∧FALSE.
As any good detective knows, an AND operation requires both sides to be TRUE to succeed. Since one side is FALSE, P2 is also FALSE.
The Conclusion
We have systematically dismantled the problem. Both P1 and P2 evaluate to FALSE.
Logic isn't just about symbols; it's about the clarity of thought. Keep practicing, and you'll find that even the most complex logical structures become simple, elegant puzzles.