What was challenging for me this week?

1)    I was having problems how to translate an english statement to symbolic language? Especially, the first question from this week’s tutorial assignment was pretty challenging for me. I felt like we did not learn how to solve this kind of problems in the lecture since this week we learned about only different laws, scoping, negation and conjunction. I felt very frustrated. I really wished we did some example questions similar to the one in the tutorial assignment during the class! 

      First I tried to use [intersection, empty set, union] and wrote a statement. However, when I checked the Larry Zhang’s slides [I go to Danny’s session, not Zhang’s but wanted to see what he was doing, I thought it might help my understanding and actually which did! yay! :)] 
I noticed that conjunctions V and ^  are used for predicates and ∩ , ∪ are used for sets. This small detail helped me a lot to clarify my understanding of the topic and see why I cannot find the solution. 

2)    2b on the tutorial assignment was challenging for me.

Steps I took: 

     i) I went over the lecture notes again and read the course reading [in which I came to learn that question 2a and 2d are True since they are part of the quantifier distributor law]. However, they didn’t help me much with the b.

     ii) Drew Venn diagram to find the solution. 

Venn diagram helped me to find the solution!

             2b:      ∃x ∊ D, P(x) ∧ Q(x) <=> (∃x ∊ D, P(x)) ∧ (∃x ∊ D, Q(x)) 

                                                              So it’s False!