Analyzing the Logical Expression
We are tasked with simplifying the symbolic logic expression:
∼[q∨((∼q)∧p)]
To visualize this, imagine a universal set U containing two overlapping sets, p and q. We first analyze the inner component: ((∼q)∧p).
In set theory, this represents the intersection of the complement of q and the set p. Physically, this is the region inside p that lies strictly outside q.
Simplifying the Union
Next, we introduce the union operator ∨ with q. We are combining the "only p" region with the entire circle q.
By painting the entire circle q and adding the remaining part of p not already covered, we effectively shade the entire area covered by both p and q. Thus, the expression q∨((∼q)∧p) is logically equivalent to p∨q.
Applying Negation and De Morgan's Law
The problem requires the negation of this entire expression, which is ∼(p∨q). Visually, this represents the region of the universal set that belongs to neither p nor q.
To express this mathematically, we invoke
De Morgan's Law, which states that the negation of a union is the intersection of the negations:
∼(A∨B)≡(∼A)∧(∼B)
Applying this to our simplified expression, we obtain:
(∼p)∧(∼q)
Algebraic Verification
To ensure absolute rigor, we apply algebraic laws directly to the original expression:
∼[q∨((∼q)∧p)]
Applying De Morgan's Law to the outer bracket, we get:
(∼q)∧∼((∼q)∧p)
Applying De Morgan's Law again to the inner bracket yields:
(∼q)∧(q∨(∼p))
Using the
Distributive Law to expand this expression:
((∼q)∧q)∨((∼q)∧(∼p))
Since
(∼q)∧q is a contradiction (always False, denoted as
F), the expression simplifies to:
F∨((∼q)∧(∼p))
Because F combined with any statement via an 'OR' operator leaves the other term unchanged, we arrive at the final result:
(∼p)∧(∼q)