R(x) is a red block
B(x) is a blue block T(x,y) block x is on top of block yQuestion:
W开发者_StackOverflowrite a formula asserting that if no red block is on top of a red block then no red block is on top of itself.My answer: (Ax)(Ay)(R(x) and R(y) -> ~T(x,y))->(Ax)(R(x)-> ~T(x,x))
A = For all ~ = Not -> = impliesThat is a plausible formulation, though not necessarily the most straight-forward translation of the sentence, which, to my mind, is (Ax)(Ay)(T(x,y) -> R(x) -> ~R(y)) -> ~(3x)(R(x) and T(x,x)). 3, here, being the existential quantifier (i.e. "there exists an").
Looks good to me.
(Ax)(Ay)(Az) { (((R(x) and R(y)) -> ~T(x,y)) -> ~T(z,z) }
精彩评论