Chapter 1 Notations

Last updated on March 7, 2026 pm

1 Logic Operations

There are 4 operators, they are ¬\neg, ∧\land, ∨\lor, ⇒\Rightarrow, the outcome of the operation is the Truth Table.

For proposition ¬A\neg A

A 0 1
¬\negA 1 0

For compound proposition A∧BA\land B

AB_A^B 0 1
0 0 0
1 0 1

For compound proposition A∨BA\lor B

AB_A^B 0 1
0 0 1
1 1 1

For compound proposition A⇒BA\Rightarrow B

AB_A^B 0 1
0 1 1
1 0 1

It might be confused for A⇒BA\Rightarrow B, when A=0A=0, no matter what the value of B is, the outcome of the operation is 1. This is because when precondition A is false, B will never violate A.

A⇒BA\Rightarrow B: If it rains today (A), I will bring an umbrella (B)

When A=0A=0, which means it doesn’t rain today, then if I take the umbrella (B=1), I don’t violate the promise, because we cannot verify whether I will take it when it rains. Also, if I didn’t take the umbrella (B=0), I still don’t violate.

When A⇒BA\Rightarrow B, we say, B is a necessary condition of A (because when B=0 then A=0, we cannot go without B), A is an adequate condition of B (because A alone will decide B), and A⇔BA\Leftrightarrow B means A is both necessary and adequate for B and vice versa.

Exercises

  1. pass
  2. Solve
    (1) ¬(A∧B)⇔¬A∨¬B\neg(A\land B)\Leftrightarrow \neg A \lor \neg B

We can write the truth table

For ¬(A∧B)\neg(A\land B)

AB_A^B01
010
100

For ¬A∨¬B\neg A \lor \neg B

AB_A^B01
010
100

Q.E.D.

There are some other relationships that can also be proved by truth tables, and we should remember them

  1. ¬(A∧B)⇔¬A∨¬B\neg(A\land B)\Leftrightarrow \neg A \lor \neg B
  2. ¬(A∨B)⇔¬A∧¬B\neg(A\lor B)\Leftrightarrow \neg A\land \neg B
  3. (A⇒B)⇔(¬B⇒¬A)(A\Rightarrow B) \Leftrightarrow (\neg B\Rightarrow \neg A)
  4. (A⇒B)⇔¬A∨B(A\Rightarrow B) \Leftrightarrow \neg A\lor B
  5. ¬(A⇒B)⇔A∧¬B\neg (A\Rightarrow B)\Leftrightarrow A\land \neg B

2 Set and Its Operators

Russell’s Paradox: Consider a set R={X∣X∉X}R=\{X|X\notin X\}, which means it contains sets that doesn’t contain themselves, then

  • If R∈RR\in R, then R should satisfy X∉XX\notin X, hence R∉RR\notin R
  • If R∉RR\notin R, then R satisfies X∉XX\notin X, hence R∈RR\in R

This creates a logical contradiction!


Chapter 1 Notations
https://lynx-li.github.io/2026/03/04/math/analysis/01/
Author
Lynx Li
Posted on
March 4, 2026
Licensed under