You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
I'm trying to understand what happens when quantifiers in the prediate are swapped.
Let's assume the following:
Two sets A and a D and a predicate H(a, d), where a ∈ A and d ∈ D.
Statement 1.
There exists d ∈ D for all a ∈ A such that H(a, d).
This one I can figure out. It means that there exists a single d for all a such that H(a, d).
Statement 2.
For all a ∈ A there exists d ∈ D such that H(a, d).
This one I can't figure out. Does it mean that for every a there exists a unique d, i.e a1 - d1, a2 - d2, a3 - d3 etc. or does it mean that d's can be shared by some a's, i.e. a1 - d1, a2 - d2, a3 - d1, a4 - d2 etc.
Any help is appreciated.
Offline
Statement 2: For all a ∈ A there exists d ∈ D such that H(a, d).
This one I can't figure out. Does it mean that for every a there exists a unique d...or does it mean that d's can be shared by some a's...?
Since Statement 2 doesn't say "there exists a unique d", I would interpret this in the same manner as for Statement 1; namely, that there exists some element d for each a. The element d doesn't have to be unique (a different d for each a).
Offline
The statements are not the same. In statement 1, one single d holds for all a; in statement 2, different a may be associated with different d. Statement 2 only says that there exists at least one d for each a.
(i) is continuous on I iff
(∀ε>0)(∀x∈I)(∃δ>0)(∀y∈I)(|x−y|<δ⇒|(x)−(y)|<ε)
(ii) is uniformly continuous on I iff
(∀ε>0)(∃δ>0)(∀x∈I)(∀y∈I)(|x−y|<δ⇒|(x)−(y)|<ε)
The two definitions are different. In (i) δ depends on x; different δ may need to be chosen for different x. In (ii), one single δ has to work for all x.
240 books currently added on Goodreads
Offline
Pages: 1