# Answer to Question #19104 in Abstract Algebra for edward

Question #19104

This is not a math problem. Because there is no philosophy to choose in the subject.

premises:∀x [(Cube(x) ∧ Large(x)) ∨ (Tet(x) ∧ Small(x))]

∀x [Tet(x) → BackOf(x, c)]

conclusion:∀x [Small(x) → BackOf(x, c)]

give an informal proof. If it is not valid, use Tarski's World to construct a counter example.

premises:∀x [(Cube(x) ∧ Large(x)) ∨ (Tet(x) ∧ Small(x))]

∀x [Tet(x) → BackOf(x, c)]

conclusion:∀x [Small(x) → BackOf(x, c)]

give an informal proof. If it is not valid, use Tarski's World to construct a counter example.

Expert's answer

Unfortunately, your question requires a lot of work and cannot be done for free.

Submit it with all requirements as an assignment to our control panel and we'll assist you.

Submit it with all requirements as an assignment to our control panel and we'll assist you.

## Comments

## Leave a comment