MathLabs
TheoremProved

De Morgan's laws for propositions

Statement

For all propositions P,QP, Q: ¬(P∧Q)≡(¬P)∨(¬Q)\neg(P \wedge Q) \equiv (\neg P) \vee (\neg Q) and ¬(P∨Q)≡(¬P)∧(¬Q)\neg(P \vee Q) \equiv (\neg P) \wedge (\neg Q).

Why is it true?

"Not both" always splits into two exhaustive cases — at least one fails — which is exactly disjunction of negations; this is the logical skeleton behind negating "for all" statements and behind digital circuits that convert AND-gates into OR-gates of inverted inputs (NAND/NOR equivalence).

Proof sketch

We prove ¬(P∧Q)≡(¬P)∨(¬Q)\neg(P \wedge Q) \equiv (\neg P) \vee (\neg Q) by exhaustively checking all four combinations of truth values for PP and QQ, since a propositional formula is fully determined by its truth table.

Case P=1,Q=1P=1, Q=1: P∧Q=1P \wedge Q = 1, so ¬(P∧Q)=0\neg(P\wedge Q)=0. Also ¬P=0\neg P=0 and ¬Q=0\neg Q=0, so (¬P)∨(¬Q)=0(\neg P)\vee(\neg Q)=0. Both sides equal 00.

Case P=1,Q=0P=1, Q=0: P∧Q=0P\wedge Q=0, so ¬(P∧Q)=1\neg(P\wedge Q)=1. Also ¬P=0\neg P=0, ¬Q=1\neg Q=1, so (¬P)∨(¬Q)=1(\neg P)\vee(\neg Q)=1. Both sides equal 11.

Case P=0,Q=1P=0, Q=1: by symmetry with the previous case, ¬(P∧Q)=1\neg(P\wedge Q)=1 and (¬P)∨(¬Q)=1(\neg P)\vee(\neg Q)=1. Both sides agree.

Case P=0,Q=0P=0, Q=0: P∧Q=0P\wedge Q=0, so ¬(P∧Q)=1\neg(P\wedge Q)=1. Also ¬P=1\neg P=1, ¬Q=1\neg Q=1, so (¬P)∨(¬Q)=1(\neg P)\vee(\neg Q)=1. Both sides agree.

All four rows of the truth table match, so ¬(P∧Q)≡(¬P)∨(¬Q)\neg(P \wedge Q) \equiv (\neg P) \vee (\neg Q) holds as a tautology (an identity true under every assignment). The second law ¬(P∨Q)≡(¬P)∧(¬Q)\neg(P \vee Q) \equiv (\neg P) \wedge (\neg Q) follows by an identical four-row check, or algebraically by substituting ¬P,¬Q\neg P, \neg Q for P,QP, Q in the first law and negating both sides using ¬¬X≡X\neg\neg X \equiv X.

Topics that use this theorem

Step-by-step proofs

No step-by-step proof yet for this theorem.

References

  1. Kenneth H. Rosen (2018). Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications
  2. George Boole (1854). An Investigation of the Laws of Thought