[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*From*: jack malkovick <sillymouse333@xxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Thu, 1 Dec 2022 11:37:29 -0800 (PST)*References*: <42656e1a-326f-4713-a373-4f639db81fdcn@googlegroups.com> <CDB2418D-0C1A-4939-BF5D-C08DA1EC72A4@gmail.com>

Ah... I supposed that P and Q will be predicates.

On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 9:29:02 PM UTC+2 Stephan Merz wrote:

Hi,I am glad that TLAPS doesn’t prove this because it’s wrong. As a simple counter-example considerP(x) == 1Q(x) == 2Clearly, you have P(x) # Q(x) for any x but we do not expect to prove 1 = ~2.What TLAPS should prove isASSUME NEW P(), NEW Q()PROVE \A x : ~(P(x) <=> Q(x)) => (P(x) <=> ~Q(x))StephanOn 1 Dec 2022, at 19:58, jack malkovick <sillym...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:How could I help TLAPS to prove this simple theorem?THEOREM TT ==

ASSUME

NEW P(_), NEW Q(_)

PROVE

\A x : (P(x) # Q(x)) => (P(x) = ~Q(x))

PROOF

OBVIOUSPS. it can prove with no problem the reverse implication\A x : (P(x) = ~Q(x)) => (P(x) # Q(x))--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tlaplus" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tlaplus+u...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tlaplus/42656e1a-326f-4713-a373-4f639db81fdcn%40googlegroups.com.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tlaplus" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tlaplus+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tlaplus/b7bdadbd-2f1c-461b-9f8d-0dd53d73b3f1n%40googlegroups.com.

**References**:**[tlaplus] another simple theorem***From:*jack malkovick

**Re: [tlaplus] another simple theorem***From:*Stephan Merz

- Prev by Date:
**Re: [tlaplus] another simple theorem** - Next by Date:
**Re: [tlaplus] another simple theorem** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [tlaplus] another simple theorem** - Next by thread:
**Re: [tlaplus] another simple theorem** - Index(es):