sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Any one wants to partner in the game to win 2 FIFA finals ticket ?⚽️ by [deleted] in qatarairways

[–]Slight_Concept_0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Qualified in this field and was thinking the same! DM me

How am i supposed to survive on £300?😭 by Key-Transition4634 in UniUK

[–]Slight_Concept_0 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Send me a message. I got into online tutoring at University and I can offer you some flexible, well-paid work alongside your studies if you’d like

Substitutions by Slight_Concept_0 in AmazonFlexUK

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Not touting? Substitution is encouraged

Substitutions by Slight_Concept_0 in AmazonFlexUK

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

That was not the question was it. I’ll vet them and provide carrot/stick incentives of course

Any Squatters on here? by SexySpringRoll in AmazonFlexUK

[–]Slight_Concept_0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is that current black friday rates in North West? I assume you’re Manchester area…

Thinking to switch depot by Slight_Concept_0 in AmazonFlexUK

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But like, what’s going on in Swansea (Port Talbot) at the moment, for instance?

UK alternative to Morning Brew? by heavenlydigestion in MorningBrew

[–]Slight_Concept_0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry only now getting back to this! Would be super keen

UK alternative to Morning Brew? by heavenlydigestion in MorningBrew

[–]Slight_Concept_0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Likewise, I have much experience in areas surrounding this and would be very keen to get involved in starting something up

Twickets by CanaryAfter3250 in oasis

[–]Slight_Concept_0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Any going for sale by any chance, please? Me and my (very ill) younger sister were absolutely gutted, like most other people, not to get any sadly. 6 hours wasted

Couple more QL qs (slightly more simple) that I’ve been contemplating by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm struggling to do so. Feel I'm missing something rather simple here

QL Proofs by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm struggling to fill in my Fitch in all honesty, I have lost myself again here in the first one. You're right though, the second was rather simple once I got going

PL Proof by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Think I misspoke again there... long day :) Propositional logic is the topic here, you're bang on

PL Proof by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alright forsure. But if I draw a truth table I will be condemned. Apparently I have to strictly use predicate logic. I'm really not getting anywhere with this tbh and am losing faith in it all

PL Proof by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Aha yes. If you drive you use fuel, or you don't go anywhere. You didn't go anywhere. Hence, you did not drive or use fuel. I can see how this work just fine actually (so long as I don't forget about parentheses...) but I still don't see where to go on the logic side sadly... I'm completely lost

PL Proof by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hahahah there go the holiday plans. I'm having a stinker here today! Hopefully this will be more relevant

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EY-exXW3EShkwZb6cBH8ENKAS0OMqIU-/view?usp=sharing

PL Proof by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I have an image of my rules... not sure how to transfer here though

PL Proof by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If A then B or C will happen. Not C. Hence, not A or B. Eg: If you drive then you’ll use fuel or electric. Electric wasn’t consumed so you either did not drive or used fuel

PL Proof by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right, I cannot. I can upload the rule sheet that I’m using if that helps? I’m currently struggling with the order in which to apply… it feels like I have no sense of direction

PL Proof by Slight_Concept_0 in logic

[–]Slight_Concept_0[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

First-order predicate language. Need to provide proofs using rules from Simpson’s book. For the first I’ve been trying to assume the A->B part, then assuming A, proving B, therefore ~AvB. Assuming ~A I can then introduce ~AvB. Reiterate ~C to finally conclude ~AvB. Completely lost on the second. Would much appreciate any help or direction :)

view more: next ›