If we agree that all folks that are lerts are dweebs,do we know that all folks who are not dweebs are not lerts.
I cant get it.. help?
if you tell me the answer can you explain me how to do it?
2007-09-09 12:12:20 · 7 answers · asked by perherp 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Mathematics
you are suppose to use a venn diagram
2007-09-09 12:37:35 · update #1
It's tricky because you'd usually use a Venn diagram to illustrate this - which I can't draw in here. Consider your folks as two circles: a small circle (your lerts) and a much larger circle (your dweebs). Draw your small circle inside the larger circle (as all lerts are dweebs),
It should be clear from the diagram that you can be:
A dweeb AND a lert (inside the small circle, inside the large circle)
A dweeb but NOT a lert (inside the large circle but not the small circle)
NEITHER a dweeb nor a lert (outside the large circle)
The one thing you CANNOT be is a lert but not a dweeb.
Further to your update: The Venn diagram is the two circles that I describe, the smaller one (lerts) wholly enclosed in the bigger one (dweebs).
2007-09-09 12:30:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
If all folks that are lerts are dweebs then lerts are a subset of the set of all dweebs. If that is the case, then folks that are not dweebs form a set that is outside the set of all dweebs. Hence there is no way lerts can be part of that set because we said lerts have to be a subset of dweebs.
So we know that all all folks who are not dweebs are not lerts.
2007-09-09 12:24:30 · answer #2 · answered by rodwel m 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Is this really a MATH puzzle?
If it is, I'd say yes.
It's saying that all lerts are dweebs, but it's not saying that all dweebs are lerts...So if you are not a dweeb you can't be a lert because if you were a lert, then you'd have to be a dweeb!
2007-09-09 12:21:31 · answer #3 · answered by Katy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
l=d
Yes, because all folks who are lerts are also dweebs. Otherwise ALL lerts are dweebs.
2007-09-09 12:37:52 · answer #4 · answered by LadyB!™ 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
its a logical question
they maybe or may not be lerts.
you can't give a yes or no
it is like all humans are living but all living things are not humans
2007-09-09 12:20:51 · answer #5 · answered by 222 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
P implies Q is equivalent to ~Q implies ~P
the above is a logical identiity
where ~Q is "not Q"
Proof:
P implies Q means ~P or Q
~Q implies ~P means ~(~Q ) or ~P
<=> Q or ~P
<=> ~P or Q
<=> P implies Q
2007-09-09 12:18:43 · answer #6 · answered by vlee1225 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well let us assume that all squares are rectangles.....are all rectangles, squares?
2007-09-09 12:17:39 · answer #7 · answered by Abby S. 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋