User talk:Makeyourignorancework4u

Welcome
Welcome to ProofWiki! Since you're new, you may want to check out the general help page. It's the best first stop to see how things are done (next to reading proofs, of course!). Please feel free to contribute to whichever area of mathematics interests you, either by adding new proofs, or fixing up existing ones. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me, or post your question on the questions page.

Here are some useful pages to help get you started:
 * Community Portal - To see what needs to be done, and keep up to date with the community.
 * Recent Changes - To keep up with what's new, and what's being added.
 * Main Page talk - This is where most of the main discussions regarding the direction of the site talk place. If you have any ideas, please share them!

Cheers, prime.mover (talk)

P or Q
I'm going to continue this discussion here, as the "current users" page is not the right page.

First of all, before the question can be answered, some knowledge of the context needs to be established. What is the P and what is the Q, where does the question come from? etc. etc.

If, as I suspect, you're coming to this from a basic computing angle, then my initial guess would be that first you see whether P is true. If it is, you return "true". If it's not, then you look to see whether Q is true. If it is, you return "true". If not, then you return "false". So, the only way to return "false" is if P is false and Q is false. If P is true, it doesn't matter what Q is, you still return true. So P and Q could both be true and you would return "true". Hence this is the "inclusive or".

This is in fact the usual case. It is rare that the "exclusive or" is used in mathematics or computing (both of these include the discipline of "logic"). If the exclusive or is meant, then it is very likely going to be specifically stated. Otherwise it's not fair on the student at the level you (I guess) are at. --prime mover 18:25, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * If this site has not been able to answer your poorly-structured question adequately, then clearly you are far, far ahead of those people who are currently able to commit their personal resources towards making this site a center of excellence. If that is the case, then you are more than welcome to add your own contributions. --prime mover 11:27, 3 October 2010 (UTC)