# Be a Part-Timer

Statement 1: A full-time candidate for the degree may be permitted to undertake part-time work in the University subject to such conditions as may be prescribed by the University.

Let Work-at-University ($W$) be divided into full time work $W_f$ and part-time work $W_p$ such that $W = W_f \cup W_p$.

Also, we classify the students ($S$) as full time students ($S_f$) and part-time students ($S_p$) where $S = S_f \cup S_p$.

We wish to investigate the relation between $S$ and  $W$.

Accordingly, we interpret Statement 1 as

Statement 2: Full time students can (only) take part-time work (in University) i.e. $S_f \to W_p$.

By contrapositive,

Statement 3: Non-part-time work (in University) can be carried out by non-full-time students i.e.  $\bar{W_p} \to \bar{S_f}$.

Since $\bar{W_p} = W_f$ and $\bar{S_f} = S_p$, we say,

Statement 4: Full-time work can be carried out by part-time students i.e. ${W_f} \to {S_p}$.

Lastly, since being lecturer is full-time work in university, you can only be part-time student (postgraduate) in University.

#

Special thanks to Tan for helping me proof theory … -_- …

## 3 thoughts on “Be a Part-Timer”

1. no want tell u says:

S_f \to W_p but is W_p \to S_f ? if cannot prove the latter then ur statement is not correct…

by the way, the sentence before statement 4 has typo?

• You have good eyes. I think only man man will check my equations one by one. Anyway, I like it.

Yes. It is a typo and I have corrected it.

#
I lazy to prove the sentence. I was told “it is like that according to policy”. So I just follow.

• no want tell u says:

lol~ policy is not to be proved, it is to be broken, muahahah!