Answer
Let\[p\]be: Person is a chemist.
Let\[q\]be: Person has a college degree.
The form of the premises is
\[\begin{align}
& \underline{\begin{align}
& p\to q \\
& \sim q \\
\end{align}}\ \ \ \ \ \underline{\begin{array}{*{35}{l}}
\text{If a person is a chemist, then that person has a college degree}\text{.} \\
\text{My best friend does not have a college degree}\text{.} \\
\end{array}} \\
& \therefore \ \ \ \ ?\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{Therefore, } \\
\end{align}\]
The conclusion \[\sim p\] is valid because it forms the contrapositive reasoning of a valid argument when it follows the given premises. The conclusion \[\sim p\] translates as my best friend is not a chemist.
Therefore, the valid conclusion from the provided premises is, my best friend is not a chemist.
The valid conclusion from the provided premises is, my best friend is not a chemist.