As written in the text, the chain of equivalences shows that (1) <>[]<>F <=> []<>F implies the equivalence (2) []<>[]F <=> <>[]F. The validity of equivalence (1) – which is the step that you are having trouble with – is argued informally, but you can justify it formally using the semantic definitions of [] and <>. Alternatively, use a PTL tautology checker. Cheers, Stephan
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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tlaplus/CA83FD0F-8B1B-4C69-B6B9-86329B232C63%40gmail.com. |