Nested quantifier: Please help me to solve this problem

62 Views Asked by At

In Rosen's Discrete Mathematics book(7e) this is the problem no. 12(m) of 1.5th chapter

There are at least two students in your class who have not chatted with the same person in your class

where

$C(x,y)$ = $x$ and $y$ have chatted over the internet.

I tried to solve this problem and thought this problem is in the form like "if x has chatted with someone z , then y hasn't chatted with z and if y has chatted with z , then x hasn't chatted with z" and finally came to a solution like this

$\exists x \exists y[(x \ne y ) \land \forall z (( C(x,z) \rightarrow \lnot C(y,z)) \land ((C(y,z) \rightarrow \lnot C(x,z))]$

Is this answer right? If not then what should be the answer.Please explain.

1

There are 1 best solutions below

2
On BEST ANSWER

Note that by Contraposition, $C(x,z) \to \neg C(y,z)$ is equivalent to $C(y,z) \to \neg C(x,z)$. So, you are saying the same thing twice there, and it suffices to just use one of them:

$$\exists x \ \exists y [x \neq y \land \forall z (C(x,z) \to C(y,z))]$$

Note that by Implication, this is equivalent to the answer suggested in the Comments:

$$\exists x \ \exists y [x \neq y \land \forall z (\neg C(x,z) \lor C(y,z))]$$

Moreover, if we do a DeMorgan on this, we get another intutive answer, namely that for any person, it is not true that both $x$ and $y$ chatted with that person:

$$\exists x \ \exists y [x \neq y \land \forall z \neg (C(x,z) \land C(y,z))]$$

Finally, using Quantifier Negation, we can pull out the negation, and obtain yet another very reasonable translation: that there isn't anyone that both $x$ and $y$ chatted with:

$$\exists x \ \exists y [x \neq y \land \neg \exists z (C(x,z) \land C(y,z))]$$