很有可能我对证伪这个词的理解有误,我认为,对一个问题的确定性的答复是NO 的时候,就被视作证伪。如果我的理解确实错误,请烦劳告诉兄弟更正,而且也没必要看下面我的论证过程了。--做正确的事,正确的做事。
OG 11th P285 No.89 TYPE: DS KEY:D That is each statement alone is sufficient.
Let me show you the solving process to see it is reasoning format.
The question: Is k~(l+m)=(k~l)+(k~m) for all numbers k, l, and m?
For short I get directly to statement 2, statement 1 is the same after simple calculation and reasoning.
(2) ~ represents subtraction.
The calculating process:
~ represents subtraction as is given directly by the problem,
Then
The left part to the equal sign is k-(l+m)
The right part to the equal sign is (k-l)+(k-m)=2k-(l+m)
If the two expressions are equal, that is
k-(l+m)=2k-(l+m)
then k=2k, so k=0
only when k=0, the equation holds.
Now, we can say NO
to the question: Is k~(l+m)=(k~l)+(k~m) for all numbers k, l, and m?
And let us have a look at the explanations to this question by the GMAC
(2) The information is given directly that the operation represented is subtraction. From this, it is possible to determine whether k~(l+m)=(k~l)+(k~m) holds for all numbers k, l, and m; SUFFICENT