parsnip283874

Pain elemental, and yes it’s a nuisance. Hiding behind a wall and peek-a-boo shooting twice or thrice with a SSG is your best strat.

Nah not surprised at all, I knew good ol’ England could do it ;)

I was actually convinced at stumps on day 4 that Aus were going to win, but Eng managed to pull through in the end. Also glad this series is done, having an emotional connection to one of the teams playing in a Test series is fun, but gets quite stressful.

However, I’m with Ponting that the ball change was poor and should be investigated. Shame one bad decision made such an impact on the game.

Seems fair enough except for the finishing on a high wrt this test I suspect, but maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

Was there another reason he gave beyond wanting to be with his family? Didn’t really see anything else in the Cricinfo article.

Looks like a minimum of 3 hours play today (possibility of rain from 3) and probably whole day’s play tomorrow. Looks like the weather won’t be ruining another Test.

What a damn, damn shame

One day in, and with the way Australia have been carrying on I don’t think an English win is likely. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see the same scores from the last test, just with the teams swapped.

I’m not sure but could it be because, in your first truth table, you assumed the truth value of (a OR b) -> c to be true and you are finding the truth values of c that correspond with pairs of values of a and b?

However, in the second table you are finding the truth values of ~(a OR b) OR c that correspond with truth values of c as well as a and b so just like you said, you cannot compare the two tables you present above.

To get the truth table for the proposition (a OR b) -> c, you would find the corresponding truth values to those of a, b and c (like you did in the first table). Something like this:

A B C   A OR B   (A OR B) -> C
000       0             1
001       0             1
010       1             0
011       1             1
100       1             0
101       1             1
110       1             0
111       1             1

since it’s possible for the conditional proposition to be false (i.e. if either A or B are true yet C is false)

Afaik they are equivalent since using the truth table of a conditional A->B, it’s false when A is true but B is false (like how a philosophical argument is invalid if the premise A is true yet the conclusion B is false) so ~(A->B) = A and ~B and A->B = ~A or B. Were you asking about something else?

Effing Mancunian weather

If it’s the weather that stops us from winning from here, I might cry