1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
MariettaO [177]
3 years ago
6

Consider the following argument. If there are as many rational numbers as there are irrational numbers, then the set of all irra

tional numbers is infinite.
The set of all irrational numbers is infinite. ∴
There are as many rational numbers as there are irrational numbers. Let p = "there are as many rational numbers as there are irrational numbers," and let q = "the set of all irrational numbers is infinite."
Is the argument valid or invalid?
Choose the answer that shows the symbolic form of the argument and justifies your conclusion.
a. form: q ∧ p valid, specialization p ∴ q
b. form: p → q invalid, converse error q ∴ p
c. form: q ∧ p invalid, converse error p ∴ q
d. form: p ∨ q invalid, inverse error q ∴ p
e. form: q → p valid, generalization p ∴ q
Mathematics
1 answer:
FrozenT [24]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

b. form: p → q invalid, converse error q ∴ p

Step-by-step explanation:

Let

p = "there are as many rational numbers as there are irrational numbers,"

let

q = "the set of all irrational numbers is infinite."

We can write the above argument as:

If there are as many rational numbers as there are irrational numbers, then the set of all irrational numbers is infinite

p → q

The set of all irrational numbers is infinite

q

There are as many rational numbers as there are irrational numbers

p

So collectively it can be written as:

p → q

 q

∴p

So it looks like

if p then q

q

therefore p

This is a fallacious argument.  This means the conclusion can be false even when the premises are true. This type of argument is invalid.

Suppose we know that “If there are as many rational numbers as there are irrational numbers, then the set of all irrational numbers is infinite” is a true conditional statement. We also know that "the set of all irrational numbers is infinite" is true. This is not enough to say that "there are as many rational numbers as there are irrational numbers," is true. The reason for this is that there is nothing logically about “If p then q” and “q” that means p must follow. So this is a converse error and since converse error is an invalid method of inference rule so this argument is invalid.

Let us prove this argument is invalid with a truth table:

p   q   p → q   q   p

T   T      T       T   T

T   F      F       F   T

F   T      T       T   F

F   F      T       F   F

Since we know that the premises are:

p → q   and  q

and the conclusion is p

and an argument is valid if and only if all of its premises are true, then the conclusion is true. We should check that whenever both p → q   and  q are true then p is true but the third row fails. Thus this is an invalid argument.

You might be interested in
WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST IF YOU HELP ME
Oduvanchick [21]
The answer is D. point S
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Help please im lost and not good in math
Damm [24]
Answers: a = 49
b = 10
c = 105
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which answer is the approximate standard deviation of the data set?
Anna35 [415]

Answer:

3.4

Step-by-step explanation:

Standard deviation of a population is defined as:

σ² = ∑(xᵢ − μ)² / n

The standard deviation of a sample is defined as:

s² = ∑(xᵢ − x)² / (n - 1)

It's not clear which one we have, so let's calculate both.

First, we must find the mean.

μ = (5+12+15+10+12+6+8+8) / 8

μ = 9.5

Now we find the squares of the differences:

(5-9.5)² + (12-9.5)² + (15-9.5)² + (10-9.5)² + (12-9.5)² + (6-9.5)² + (8-9.5)² + (8-9.5)²

= 80

Divide by n:

σ² = 80 / 8

σ² = 10

And take the square root:

σ = √10

σ ≈ 3.2

That's not one of the answers, so let's try the standard deviation of a sample instead of a population.

Instead of dividing by n, we'll divide by n-1:

s² = 80 / 7

And take the square root:

s = √(80/7)

s ≈ 3.4

So that must be it.

6 0
3 years ago
Help me out, please!!!! Need an answer asap!!!
Kazeer [188]

Answer:

D

Step-by-step explanation:


8 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
A recursive rule for a geometric sequence is a1=3;an=12an−1 . What is the explicit rule for this sequence?
ehidna [41]
From the recursive rule, you can tell the initial value is 3 and the common ratio is 12. The explicit rule is always
.. (n-th term) = (initial value)*(common ratio)^(n -1)

Subsituting the values you know, you have
.. an = 3*12^(n-1)
6 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • You have two credit cards. One has a balance of $3,745.00 at a 6.25% APR and the other has a balance of $1,045.00 and is depende
    8·2 answers
  • After getting 5 new rocks, George gave half of his rock collection to Susan. If George gave Susan 36 rocks, which equation could
    14·2 answers
  • Just need to know what x is
    15·1 answer
  • If 2(x - 5) + 3(x - 5) = 10, what is the value of x - 5?
    5·2 answers
  • If there are 1000 grams in a kilogram in 454 grams in a pound how many pounds are there in a kilogram?
    15·1 answer
  • If i had 33 watermelons in one hand and 21 apples in another <br> what do i have?
    8·2 answers
  • A shadow is cast by a pole. The angle of elevation from the end of the shadow to the top of
    6·1 answer
  • Pls answer
    11·1 answer
  • Assume a test for a disease has a probability 0.05 of incorrectly identifying an individual as infected (False Positive), and a
    12·1 answer
  • Help with this math question
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!