Scribd
Upload
116 views11 pages

CSC510 - Lecture 5 - MOP

This document discusses various methods of proof in mathematics, including: - Direct proof, which proceeds from premises to conclusion through logical steps. - Indirect proof (proof by contradiction), which assumes the negation of the conclusion. - Proof by cases, which considers all possible cases separately. - Proving universally and existentially quantified statements by considering all values or providing a single example, respectively, within the given domain. Formal proofs follow logically from premises and axioms using rules of inference.

Uploaded by

Muhammad Hakim
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
116 views11 pages

CSC510 - Lecture 5 - MOP

This document discusses various methods of proof in mathematics, including: - Direct proof, which proceeds from premises to conclusion through logical steps. - Indirect proof (proof by contradiction), which assumes the negation of the conclusion. - Proof by cases, which considers all possible cases separately. - Proving universally and existentially quantified statements by considering all values or providing a single example, respectively, within the given domain. Formal proofs follow logically from premises and axioms using rules of inference.

Uploaded by

Muhammad Hakim
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 11

METHODS OF PROOF

PROOFS
 an argument supporting the validity of the statement
 proof of the theorem:
 shows that the conclusion follows from premises
 may use:
 Premises
 Axioms (Axiom is a rule or a statement that is accepted as true without proof. An axiom
is also called a postulate)
 Results of other theorems

Formal proofs:
 steps of the proofs follow logically from the set of premises and axioms
 we assume formal proofs in propositional logic
Direct Proof
 Direct Proofs lead from premises of a theorem to the conclusion.
Example:
P→Q
 We only need to consider the case P is true because when its false, the
argument is true (by default)
 Assume that P is true. Next, we use axioms, definitions, and previously
proven theorems, together with the rules of inference, to show that Q is true.
 If we can deduce that Q is true, therefore P → Q is true.

p q p→q
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T
Direct Proof

Example:
Give a direct proof “If n is an odd integer, then n2 is odd”
 Assume hypothesis “n is an odd integer” is true
 Definition of odd integer is n = 2k +1, where k is some integer
 Show that n2 is odd :
n2 = (2k +1)2
= 4k2 + 4k + 1
= 2(2k2 + 2k) + 1
Therefore n2 is odd.
Consequently, we have proven that “If n is an odd integer, then n2 is odd” is true.
Direct Proof

Example:
Give a direct proof “If m, n are odd integers, then m x n is odd”
 Assume hypothesis “m, n are odd integers” is true
 Definition of odd integer is n = 2k +1, m = 2l + 1 where k, l is some integer
 Show that m x n is odd:
mxn = (2k +1) x (2l +1)
= 2kl + 2k + 2l + 1
= 2(kl + k + l) + 1
Therefore m x n is odd.
Consequently, we have proven that “If m, n are odd integers, then m x n is odd”
is true.
Indirect Proof
 Proof by contraposition.
Example:
P → Q <=> ¬Q → ¬P
 Assume that ¬Q is true. Next, we use axioms, definitions, and previously
proven theorems, together with the rules of inference, to show that ¬P is
true.
 If we can deduce that ¬P is true, therefore P → Q is true.

p q p→q
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T
Indirect Proof

Example:
Give an indirect proof “If 3n + 2 is odd then n is odd”
 Assume hypothesis “n is even” is true
 Definition of even integer is n = 2k, where k is some integer
 Show that 3n + 2 is even:
3n + 2 = 3(2k) + 2
= 6k + 2
= 2(3k + 1)
Therefore 3n + 2 is even.
Consequently, we have proven that “If 3n + 2 is odd then n is odd” is true.
Proof by Cases

P → Q, where P = P1 ∨ P2 ∨ P3 ∨ P4 ∨ P5 ∨……. ∨ Pn
 if the hypothesis naturally breaks down into parts
(P1 ∨ P2 ∨ P3 ∨ P4 ∨ P5 ∨……. ∨ Pn), we prove P1 →
Q, P2 → Q, P3 → Q,….., Pn → Q
 Hence, P (the whole parts ) is true, so the
proposition is correct.
Proof by Cases

Example: Show that |x||y|=|xy|


Proof:
 4 cases:
 x>=0, y>=0 xy >0 and |xy|=xy=|x||y|
 x>= 0, y<0 xy <0 and |xy|=-xy =x (-y)=|x||y|
 x<0, y>=0 xy <0 and |xy|=-xy =(-x) y=|x||y|
 x<0, y<0 xy >0 and |xy|= (-x)(-y) =|x||y|
All cases proved.
Proving Universally Quantified
Statements
 To prove ∀x P(x) is true, we have to exhaustively
show that for every x in the universe of discourse,
P(x) is true.
 To prove ∀x P(x) is false, we provide proof there
exist a value for x in the universe of discourse,
that makes P(x) false.
Proving Existentially Quantified
Statements
 To prove ∃x P(x) is true, we provide proof there
exist a value for x in the universe of discourse,
that makes P(x) true.
 To prove ∃x P(x) is false, we have to exhaustively
show that for every x in the universe of discourse,
P(x) is false.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy