|
|
![[parent]](http://images.planetmath.org:8080/images/uparrow.png) Viewing Correction to 'implication'
|
fun facts by vampyr
Correction id: 1044
Filed on: 2002-08-30 15:27:51
Status: Accepted on 2002-08-31 22:52:55
Type: Addendum
Correction text:
1. Perhaps you should define "hypothesis" and "conclusion."
2. When I was a young lad, I was taught that "p implies q" is equivalent to "q or not p." This makes it easy to remember all the funny rules.
3. Perhaps you should define "vacuously true." If you wish you can copy this:
If the proposition $p$ is always false, then $p \implies q$ is said to be \emph{vacuously true}, regardless of what $q$ is. For example, the proposition "If $x \in \emptyset$, then $x = 3$" is vacuously true because there is no $x$ satisfying $x \in \emptyset$.
Or write it yourself. Or reject this correction. It's all good. |
Comment from object owner akrowne:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
