It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

- 30.1K All Categories
- 25.5K LSAT
- 15.8K General
- 26 Sage Advice
- 4.6K Logical Reasoning
- 1.2K Reading Comprehension
- 1.6K Logic Games
- 65 Podcasts
- 186 Webinars
- 5 Scholarships
- 191 Test Center Reviews
- 1.7K Study Groups
- 98 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.2K Specific LSAT Dates
- 14 June 2023 LSAT
- 6 April 2023 LSAT
- 9 February 2023 LSAT
- 25 January 2023 LSAT
- 4.6K Not LSAT
- 3.8K Law School Admissions
- 8 Law School Explained
- 11 Forum Rules
- 510 Technical Problems
- 268 Off-topic

anjkumar87
Alum Member

Hi all,

I'm struggling with the translation of "cannot."

In an In/Out game if A & B "cannot" be together, then:

- is A <--> not B and B <--> not A (or rather, is a biconditional relationship necessarily created)? because they are always apart/never together?

In a Grouping game, if A & B "cannot" be together, then:

- is a negate necessary the only result? - is A ---> not B and B --> A?

## Comments

Hi @anjkumar87,

•

In/Out GameIf A and B

cannot betogether and A and B have to be in the In group or the Out group, then you have to represent it as A <---> /B.•

Grouping GameThere are more than two groups with items that are not repeatable, and A and B

cannot betogether, you should represent it as A ---> /B because this means that if A is in one group, B cannot be in that group. There is no particular Out group. We look at each group as "In group", and we see that if A is in a group, B has to be in other groups.This discussion might clear things up:

https://7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/14156/confusing-bi-conditional-vs-not-both-in-lg

Do you have the test and game number?