Let us prove that (pβ¨q)β§(pβr)β§(qβs)βrβ¨s is a tautology using proof by contraposition. Suppose that the formula is not a tautology. Then there exists (p0β,q0β,r0β,s0β)β{T,F}4 such that β£(p0ββ¨q0β)β§(p0ββr0β)β§(q0ββs0β)βr0ββ¨s0ββ£=F. The definition of implication implies that β£(p0ββ¨q0β)β§(p0ββr0β)β§(q0ββs0β)β£=T and β£r0ββ¨s0ββ£=F.
The definitions of conjunction and disjunction imply that β£p0ββ¨q0ββ£=β£p0ββr0ββ£=β£q0ββs0ββ£=T and β£r0ββ£=β£s0ββ£=F. It follows from β£p0ββ£βF=β£q0ββ£βF=T that β£p0ββ£=β£q0ββ£=F. Consequently, β£p0ββ¨q0ββ£=Fβ¨F=F and we have a contradiction with β£p0ββ¨q0ββ£=T. Therefore, our assumption is not true, and we conclude that the formula (pβ¨q)β§(pβr)β§(qβs)βrβ¨s is a tautology.
Comments