The Foundations: Logic and Proofs

Chapter 1, Part IV: Proofs

 Introduction to Proofs
Section 1.7

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Section Summary 2

Mathematical Proofs
Forms of Theorems
Direct Proofs
Indirect Proofs
• Proof of the Contrapositive
• Proof by Contradiction

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proofs of Mathematical Statements
A proof is a valid argument that establishes the truth of a
statement.
In math, CS, and other disciplines, informal proofs which are
generally shorter, are generally used.
• More than one rule of inference are often used in a step.
• Steps may be skipped.
• The rules of inference used are not explicitly stated.
• Easier for to understand and to explain to people.
• But it is also easier to introduce errors.
Proofs have many practical applications:
• verification that computer programs are correct
• establishing that operating systems are secure
• enabling programs to make inferences in artificial intelligence
• showing that system specifications are consistent
© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education
 Definitions
A theorem is a statement that can be shown to be true using:
• definitions
• other theorems
• axioms (statements which are given as true)
• rules of inference
A lemma is a ‘helping theorem’ or a result which is needed to
prove a theorem.
A corollary is a result which follows directly from a theorem.
Less important theorems are sometimes called propositions.
A conjecture is a statement that is being proposed to be true.
Once a proof of a conjecture is found, it becomes a theorem. It
may turn out to be false.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Forms of Theorems
Many theorems assert that a property holds for all elements in a
domain, such as the integers, the real numbers, or some of the
discrete structures that we will study in this class.
Often the universal quantifier (needed for a precise statement of
a theorem) is omitted by standard mathematical convention.
For example, the statement:
“If x > y, where x and y are positive real numbers, then x2 > y2 ”
really means
“For all positive real numbers x and y, if x > y, then x2 > y2 .”

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proving Theorems
Many theorems have the form:
∀x (P (x) → Q (x))

So, we must prove something of the form:

P (c ) → Q (c )

where c is an arbitrary element of the domain,

By universal generalization the truth of the original
formula follows.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proving Conditional Statements: p → q
Trivial Proof: If we know q is true, then
p → q is true as well.
“If it is raining then 1=1.”
Vacuous Proof: If we know p is false then
p → q is true as well.
“If I am both rich and poor then 2 + 2 = 5.”
[ Even though these examples seem silly, both trivial and vacuous
proofs are often used in mathematical induction, as we will see in
Chapter 5) ]

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Even and Odd Integers
Definition: The integer n is even if there exists an
integer k such that n = 2k, and n is odd if there
exists an integer k, such that n = 2k + 1. Note that
every integer is either even or odd and no integer
is both even and odd.
We will need this basic fact about the integers in
some of the example proofs to follow. We will
learn more about the integers in Chapter 4.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proving Conditional Statements: p → q 1

Direct Proof: Assume that p is true. Use rules of inference, axioms,

and logical equivalences to show that q must also be true.
Example: Give a direct proof of the theorem “If n is an odd integer,
then n2 is odd.”
Solution: Assume that n is odd. Then n = 2k + 1 for an integer k.
Squaring both sides of the equation, we get:
n2 = (2k + 1)2 = 4k2 + 4k +1 = 2(2k2 + 2k) + 1= 2r + 1,
where r = 2k2 + 2k , an integer.
We have proved that if n is an odd integer, then n2 is an odd integer.
QED

(QED marks the end of the proof. Sometimes ☐ is used instead.)

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proving Conditional Statements: p → q 2

Definition: The real number r is rational if there exist integers p

and q where q≠0 such that r = p/q
Example: Prove that the sum of two rational numbers is rational.
Solution: Assume r and s are two rational numbers. Then there
must be integers p, q and also t, u such that

r = p / q, s = t / u , u ≠ 0, q ≠ 0
p t pu + qt v
r+s= + = = where v = pu + qt
q u qu w w = qu ≠ 0

Thus the sum is rational.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proving Conditional Statements: p → q 3

Proof by Contraposition: Assume ¬q and show ¬p is true also.

This is sometimes called an indirect proof method. If we give a
direct proof of ¬q → ¬p then we have a proof of p → q.
Why does this work?
Example: Prove that if n is an integer and 3n + 2 is odd, then n is
odd.
Solution: Assume n is even. So, n = 2k for some integer k. Thus
3n + 2 = 3(2k) + 2 =6k +2 = 2(3k + 1) = 2j for j = 3k +1
Therefore 3n + 2 is even. Since we have shown ¬q → ¬p , p → q
must hold as well. If n is an integer and 3n + 2 is odd (not even) ,
then n is odd (not even).

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proving Conditional Statements: p → q 4

Example: Prove that for an integer n, if n2 is odd, then n

is odd.
Solution: Use proof by contraposition. Assume n is even
(i.e., not odd). Therefore, there exists an integer k such
that n = 2k. Hence,
n2 = 4k2 = 2 (2k2)
and n2 is even(i.e., not odd).
We have shown that if n is an even integer, then n2 is
even. Therefore by contraposition, for an integer n, if n2
is odd, then n is odd.
© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education
 Proving Conditional Statements: p → q 5

Proof by Contradiction: (AKA reductio ad absurdum).

To prove p, assume ¬p and derive a contradiction such as
p ∧ ¬p. (an indirect form of proof). Since we have shown
that ¬p →F is true , it follows that the contrapositive T→p
also holds.
Example: Prove that if you pick 22 days from the calendar, at
least 4 must fall on the same day of the week.
Solution: Assume that no more than 3 of the 22 days fall on
the same day of the week. Because there are 7 days of the
week, we could only have picked 21 days. This contradicts
the assumption that we have picked 22 days.
© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education
 Proof by Contradiction 1

Example: Use a proof by contradiction to give a proof that √2 is irrational.

Solution: Suppose √2 is rational. Then there exists integers a and b with √2 =
a/b, where b≠ 0 and a and b have no common factors (see Chapter 4). Then

a2
2= 2 2b 2 = a 2
b
Therefore a2 must be even. If a2 is even then a must be even (an exercise). Since
a is even, a = 2c for some integer c. Thus,

2b 2 = 4c 2 b 2 = 2c 2
Therefore b2 is even. Again then b must be even as well.
But then 2 must divide both a and b. This contradicts our assumption that a
and b have no common factors. We have proved by contradiction that our
initial assumption must be false and therefore √2 is irrational.
© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education
 Proof by Contradiction 2

Example: Prove that there is no largest prime number.

Solution: Assume that there is a largest prime number.
Call it pn. Hence, we can list all the primes 2,3,.., pn. Form

r = p1 × p2 × … × pn + 1
None of the prime numbers on the list divides r.
Therefore, by a theorem in Chapter 4, either r is prime or
there is a smaller prime that divides r. This contradicts
the assumption that there is a largest prime. Therefore,
there is no largest prime.
© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education
Theorems that are Biconditional Statements
To prove a theorem that is a biconditional statement, that
is, a statement of the form p ↔ q, we show that p → q
and q →p are both true.
Example: Prove the theorem: “If n is an integer, then n is
odd if and only if n2 is odd.”
Solution: We have already shown (previous slides) that
both p →q and q →p. Therefore we can conclude p ↔ q.
Sometimes iff is used as an abbreviation for “if and only if,” as in
“If n is an integer, then n is odd iff n2 is odd.”

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Looking Ahead
If direct methods of proof does not work:
• We may need a clever use of a proof by
contraposition / contradiction.
• In the next section, we will see strategies that can be
used when straightforward approaches do not work.
• In Chapter 5, we will see mathematical induction and
related techniques.
• In Chapter 6, we will see combinatorial proofs

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proof Methods and Strategy
Section 1.8

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Section Summary 3

Proof by Cases
Existence Proofs
• Constructive
• Nonconstructive
Disproof by Counterexample
Nonexistence Proofs
Uniqueness Proofs
Proof Strategies
Proving Universally Quantified Assertions

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proof by Cases 1

To prove a conditional statement of the form:

(p1 ∨ p2 ∨ … ∨ pn )→ q
Use the tautology

⎡⎣(p1 ∨ p2 ∨ … ∨ pn )→ q ⎤⎦ ↔
⎡⎣(p1 → q )∧ (p2 → q )∧ … ∧ (pn → q )⎤⎦

Each of the implications pi → q is a case.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proof by Cases 2

Example: Let a @ b = max{a, b} = (a if a ≥ b else b).

Show that for all real numbers a, b, c
(a @ b) @ c = a @ (b @ c)
(This means the operation @ is associative.)
Proof: Let a, b, and c be arbitrary real numbers.
Then one of the following 6 cases must hold.
1. a ≥ b ≥ c
2. a ≥ c ≥ b
3. b ≥ a ≥ c
4. b ≥ c ≥ a
5. c ≥ a ≥ b
6. c≥b≥a
Continued on next slide à

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proof by Cases 3

Case 1: a ≥ b ≥ c
(a @ b) = a, a @ c = a, b @ c = b
Hence (a @ b) @ c = a = a @ (b @ c)
Therefore the equality holds for the first case.
A complete proof requires that the equality be
shown to hold for all 6 cases. But the proofs of
the remaining cases are similar. Try them.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Without Loss of Generality
Example: Show that if x and y are integers and both x∙y and x+y
are even, then both x and y are even.
Proof: Use a proof by contraposition. Suppose x and y are not
both even. Then, one or both are odd. Without loss of generality,
assume that x is odd. Then x = 2m + 1 for some integer m.
Case 1: y is even. Then y = 2n for some integer n, so
x + y = (2m + 1) + 2n = 2(m + n) + 1 is odd.
Case 2: y is odd. Then y = 2n + 1 for some integer n, so
x ∙ y = (2m + 1) (2n + 1) = 2(2m ∙ n +m + n) + 1 is odd.
We only cover the case where x is odd because the case where
y is odd is similar. The use phrase without loss of generality
(WLOG) indicates this.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Srinivasa
Existence Proofs Ramanujan
(1887-1920)

Proof of theorems of the form ∃xP (x) .

Constructive existence proof:
• Find an explicit value of c, for which P(c) is true.
• Then ∃xP (x) is true by Existential Generalization (EG).
Example: Show that there is a positive integer that can be written
as the sum of cubes of positive integers in two different ways:
Proof: 1729 is such a number since
1729 = 103 + 93 = 123 + 13

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Nonconstructive Existence Proofs
In a nonconstructive existence proof, we assume no c
exists which makes P(c) true and derive a contradiction.
Example: Show that there exist irrational numbers x and
y such that xy is rational.
Proof: (On board)

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Counterexamples
Recall ∃x¬P (x) ≡ ¬∀xP (x) .
To establish that ¬∀xP (x) is true (or ∀xP (x) is false)
find a c such that ¬P(c) is true or P(c) is false.
In this case c is called a counterexample to
the assertion ∀xP (x )

Example: “Every positive integer is the sum of the squares of 3

integers.” The integer 7 is a counterexample. So the claim is false.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Uniqueness Proofs
Some theorems asset the existence of a unique element with a
particular property, ∃!x P(x). The two parts of a uniqueness proof
are
• Existence: We show that an element x with the property exists.
• Uniqueness: We show that if y≠x, then y does not have the property.
Example: Show that if a and b are real numbers and a ≠0, then
there is a unique real number r such that ar + b = 0.
Solution:
• Existence: The real number r = −b/a is a solution of ar + b = 0 because a(−b/
a) + b = −b + b =0.
• Uniqueness: Suppose that s is a real number such that as + b = 0. Then ar +
b = as + b, where r = −b/a. Subtracting b from both sides and dividing by a
shows that r = s.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proof Strategies for proving p → q
Choose a method.
1. First try a direct method of proof.
2. If this does not work, try an indirect method (e.g., try to prove
the contrapositive).
For whichever method you are trying, choose a strategy.
1. First try forward reasoning. Start with the axioms and known
theorems and construct a sequence of steps that end in the
conclusion. Start with p and prove q, or start with ¬q and prove ¬p.
2. If this doesn’t work, try backward reasoning. When trying to prove
q, find a statement p that we can prove with the property p → q.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Backward Reasoning
Example: Suppose that two people play a game taking turns removing, 1, 2, or 3 stones at a time from
a pile that begins with 15 stones. The person who removes the last stone wins the game. Show that
the first player can win the game no matter what the second player does.
Proof: Let n be the last step of the game.
Step n: Player1 can win if the pile contains 1,2, or 3 stones.

Step n-1: Player2 will have to leave such a pile if the pile that he/she is faced with has 4 stones.

Step n-2: Player1 can leave 4 stones when there are 5,6, or 7 stones left at the beginning of his/her
turn.
Step n-3: Player2 must leave such a pile, if there are 8 stones .

Step n-4: Player1 has to have a pile with 9,10, or 11 stones to ensure that there are 8 left.

Step n-5: Player2 needs to be faced with 12 stones to be forced to leave 9,10, or 11.

Step n-6: Player1 can leave 12 stones by removing 3 stones.

Now reasoning forward, the first player can ensure a win by removing 3 stones and leaving 12.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Universally Quantified Assertions 1

To prove theorems of the form ∀xP (x) ,assume x is an arbitrary member of the
domain and show that P(x) must be true. Using UG it follows that ∀xP (x) .
Example: An integer x is even if and only if x2 is even.
Solution: The quantified assertion is
∀x [x is even ↔ x2 is even]
We assume x is arbitrary.
Recall that P ↔ q is equivalent to (P → q ) ∧ (q → p )
So, we have two cases to consider. These are considered in turn.

Continued on next slide à

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Universally Quantified Assertions 2

Case 1. We show that if x is even then x2 is even using a

direct proof (the only if part or necessity).
If x is even then x = 2k for some integer k.
Hence x2 = 4k2 = 2(2k2 ) which is even since it is an integer
divisible by 2.
This completes the proof of case 1.

Case 2 on next slide à

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Universally Quantified Assertions 3

Case 2. We show that if x2 is even then x must be even (the if part

or sufficiency). We use a proof by contraposition.
Assume x is not even and then show that x2 is not even.
If x is not even then it must be odd. So, x = 2k + 1 for some k.
Then x2 = (2k + 1)2 = 4k2 + 4k + 1 = 2(2k2 + 2k) + 1
which is odd and hence not even. This completes the proof of
case 2.
Since x was arbitrary, the result follows by UG.
Therefore we have shown that x is even if and only if x2 is even.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Proof and Disproof: Tilings
Example 1: Can we tile the standard checkerboard using dominos?
Solution: Yes! One example provides a constructive existence proof

Two Dominoes

The Standard Checkerboard One Possible Solution

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Tilings 1

Example 2: Can we tile a checkerboard obtained by

removing one of the four corner squares of a standard
checkerboard?
Solution:
Our checkerboard has 64 − 1 = 63 squares.
Since each domino has two squares, a board with a tiling
must have an even number of squares.
The number 63 is not even.
We have a contradiction.

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education

 Tilings 2

Example 3: Can we tile a board obtained by removing both the

upper left and the lower right squares of a standard checkerboard?

Dominoes

Nonstandard Checkerboard

Jump to long description

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education
 Tilings 3

Solution:
There are 62 squares in this board.
To tile it we need 31 dominos.
Key fact: Each domino covers one black and one white
square.
Therefore the tiling covers 31 black squares and 31 white
squares.
Our board has either 30 black squares and 32 white
squares or 32 black squares and 30 white squares.
Contradiction!
© 2019 McGraw-Hill Education