Methods of Proof Lecture 3: Sep 9. This Lecture Now we have learnt the basics in logic. We are going to apply the logical rules in proving mathematical.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
With examples from Number Theory
Advertisements

Introduction to Proofs
PROOF BY CONTRADICTION
Chapter 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof.
Mathematical induction Isaac Fung. Announcement ► Homework 1 released ► Due on 6 Oct 2008 (in class)
Proofs, Recursion and Analysis of Algorithms Mathematical Structures for Computer Science Chapter 2 Copyright © 2006 W.H. Freeman & Co.MSCS SlidesProofs,
Mathematical Induction II Lecture 14: Nov
Induction Lecture 5: Sep 21 (chapter of the book and chapter of the notes)
More Number Theory Proofs Rosen 1.5, 3.1. Prove or Disprove If m and n are even integers, then mn is divisible by 4. The sum of two odd integers is odd.
Logic and Proof. Argument An argument is a sequence of statements. All statements but the first one are called assumptions or hypothesis. The final statement.
Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof. Basic Definitions An integer n is an even number if there exists an integer k such that n = 2k. An integer.
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 01/31/12 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 02/01/11
Logic: Connectives AND OR NOT P Q (P ^ Q) T F P Q (P v Q) T F P ~P T F
Copyright © Zeph Grunschlag,
1 Indirect Argument: Contradiction and Contraposition.
Methods of Proof Leo Cheung. A Quick Review Direct proof Proof by contrapositive Proof by contradiction Proof by induction.
Introduction to Proofs ch. 1.6, pg. 87,93 Muhammad Arief download dari
Methods of Proof Lecture 4: Sep 16 (chapter 3 of the book)
Induction (chapter of the book and chapter of the notes)
Methods of Proof & Proof Strategies
Introduction to Proofs
Mathematics Review Exponents Logarithms Series Modular arithmetic Proofs.
Introduction to Proofs
1 Methods of Proof CS/APMA 202 Epp, chapter 3 Aaron Bloomfield.
Proofs 1/25/12.
Methods of Proof. This Lecture Now we have learnt the basics in logic. We are going to apply the logical rules in proving mathematical theorems. Direct.
Chapter 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof.
Section 1.8. Section Summary Proof by Cases Existence Proofs Constructive Nonconstructive Disproof by Counterexample Nonexistence Proofs Uniqueness Proofs.
CS 173, Lecture B August 27, 2015 Tandy Warnow. Proofs You want to prove that some statement A is true. You can try to prove it directly, or you can prove.
Methods of Proofs PREDICATE LOGIC The “Quantifiers” and are known as predicate quantifiers. " means for all and means there exists. Example 1: If we.
CSci 2011 Discrete Mathematics Lecture 6
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Chapter 3: Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proofs Instructor: Hayk Melikya Direct.
Discrete Mathematics Tutorial 11 Chin
Chapter 5 Existence and Proof by contradiction
Mathematical Induction I Lecture 4: Sep 16. This Lecture Last time we have discussed different proof techniques. This time we will focus on probably the.
Fall 2008/2009 I. Arwa Linjawi & I. Asma’a Ashenkity 11 The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Introduction to Proofs.
1 Discrete Structures – CNS2300 Text Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications Kenneth H. Rosen (5 th Edition) Chapter 3 The Foundations: Logic and Proof,
Chapter 1: Introduction
Week 4 - Monday.  What did we talk about last time?  Divisibility  Quotient-remainder theorem  Proof by cases.
Method of proofs.  Consider the statements: “Humans have two eyes”  It implies the “universal quantification”  If a is a Human then a has two eyes.
CS104:Discrete Structures Chapter 2: Proof Techniques.
Introduction to Proofs
1 CMSC 250 Chapter 3, Number Theory. 2 CMSC 250 Introductory number theory l A good proof should have: –a statement of what is to be proven –"Proof:"
Week 4 - Wednesday.  What did we talk about last time?  Divisibility  Proof by cases.
Mathematical Induction I Lecture 5: Sep 20 (chapter of the textbook and chapter of the course notes)
Section 1.7. Definitions A theorem is a statement that can be shown to be true using: definitions other theorems axioms (statements which are given as.
EXAMPLE 3 Write an indirect proof Write an indirect proof that an odd number is not divisible by 4. GIVEN : x is an odd number. PROVE : x is not divisible.
Methods of Proof Lecture 4: Sep 20 (chapter 3 of the book, except 3.5 and 3.8)
CS 173, Lecture B August 27, 2015 Tandy Warnow. Proofs You want to prove that some statement A is true. You can try to prove it directly, or you can prove.
Induction (chapter of the book and chapter of the notes)
Chapter 1 Logic and Proof.
Hubert Chan (Chapters 1.6, 1.7, 4.1)
The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
CSE15 Discrete Mathematics 02/01/17
Direct Proof by Contraposition Direct Proof by Contradiction
Mathematical Induction II
Predicate Calculus Validity
Hubert Chan (Chapters 1.6, 1.7, 4.1)
Indirect Argument: Contradiction and Contraposition
The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
CS 220: Discrete Structures and their Applications
CS 220: Discrete Structures and their Applications
Section 2.1 Proof Techniques Introduce proof techniques:   o        Exhaustive Proof: to prove all possible cases, Only if it is about a.
Methods of Proof Rosen 1.7, 1.8 Lecture 4: Sept 24, 25.
Indirect Argument: Contradiction and Contraposition
Dr. Halimah Alshehri MATH 151 Dr. Halimah Alshehri Dr. Halimah Alshehri.
Induction Rosen 5 Lecture 8: Oct 29, 30.
Proof: [We take the negation and suppose it to be true.]
Methods of Proof Rosen 1.7, 1.8 Lecture 4: Sept, 2019.
Presentation transcript:

Methods of Proof Lecture 3: Sep 9

This Lecture Now we have learnt the basics in logic. We are going to apply the logical rules in proving mathematical theorems. Direct proof Contrapositive Proof by contradiction Proof by cases

Basic Definitions An integer n is an even number if there exists an integer k such that n = 2k. An integer n is an odd number if there exists an integer k such that n = 2k+1.

Proving an Implication Goal: If P, then Q. (P implies Q) Method 1: Write assume P, then show that Q logically follows. The sum of two even numbers is even. x = 2m, y = 2n x+y = 2m+2n = 2(m+n) Proof

Direct Proofs The product of two odd numbers is odd. x = 2m+1, y = 2n+1 xy = (2m+1)(2n+1) = 4mn + 2m + 2n + 1 = 2(2mn+m+n) + 1. Proof If m and n are perfect square, then m+n+2√(mn) is a perfect square. Proofm = a 2 and n = b 2 for some integers a and b Then m + n + 2√(mn) = a 2 + b 2 + 2ab = (a + b) 2 So m + n + 2√(mn) is a perfect square.

This Lecture Direct proof Contrapositive Proof by contradiction Proof by cases

Proving an Implication Claim: If r is irrational, then √r is irrational. How to begin with? What if I prove “If √r is rational, then r is rational”, is it equivalent? Yes, this is equivalent, because it is the contrapositive of the statement, so proving “if P, then Q” is equivalent to proving “if not Q, then not P”. Goal: If P, then Q. (P implies Q) Method 1: Write assume P, then show that Q logically follows.

Rational Number R is rational  there are integers a and b such that and b ≠ 0. numerator denominator Is a rational number? Is 0 a rational number? If m and n are non-zero integers, is (m+n)/mn a rational number? Is the sum of two rational numbers a rational number? Is x= …… a rational number? Yes, 281/1000 Yes, 0/1 Yes Yes, a/b+c/d=(ad+bc)/bd Note that 100x-x=12, and so x=12/99.

Proving the Contrapositive Claim: If r is irrational, then √r is irrational. Method 2: Prove the contrapositive, i.e. prove “not Q implies not P”. Proof: We shall prove the contrapositive – “if √r is rational, then r is rational.” Since √r is rational, √r = a/b for some integers a,b. So r = a 2 /b 2. Since a,b are integers, a 2,b 2 are integers. Therefore, r is rational. (Q.E.D.) "which was to be demonstrated", or “quite easily done”. Goal: If P, then Q. (P implies Q) Q.E.D.

Proving an “if and only if” Goal: Prove that two statements P and Q are “logically equivalent”, that is, one holds if and only if the other holds. Example: For an integer n, n is even if and only if n 2 is even. Method 1a: Prove P implies Q and Q implies P. Method 1b: Prove P implies Q and not P implies not Q. Method 2: Construct a chain of if and only if statement.

Proof the Contrapositive Statement: If n 2 is even, then n is even Statement: If n is even, then n 2 is even n = 2k n 2 = 4k 2 Proof: n 2 = 2k n = √(2k) ?? For an integer n, n is even if and only if n 2 is even. Method 1a: Prove P implies Q and Q implies P.

Since n is an odd number, n = 2k+1 for some integer k. So n 2 is an odd number. Proof the Contrapositive Statement: If n 2 is even, then n is even Contrapositive: If n is odd, then n 2 is odd. So n 2 = (2k+1) 2 = (2k) 2 + 2(2k) + 1 Proof (the contrapositive): Method 1b: Prove P implies Q and not P implies not Q. For an integer n, n is even if and only if n 2 is even. = 2(2k 2 + 2k) + 1

This Lecture Direct proof Contrapositive Proof by contradiction Proof by cases

Proof by Contradiction To prove P, you prove that not P would lead to ridiculous result, and so P must be true.

Suppose was rational. Choose m, n integers without common prime factors (always possible) such that Show that m and n are both even, thus having a common factor 2, a contradiction! Theorem: is irrational. Proof (by contradiction): Proof by Contradiction

so can assume so n is even. so m is even. Proof by Contradiction Theorem: is irrational. Proof (by contradiction):Want to prove both m and n are even. Recall that m is even if and only if m 2 is even.

Infinitude of the Primes Theorem. There are infinitely many prime numbers. Assume there are only finitely many primes. Let p 1, p 2, …, p N be all the primes. (1) We will construct a number N so that N is not divisible by any p i. By our assumption, it means that N is not divisible by any prime number. (2) On the other hand, we show that any number must be divided by some prime. It leads to a contradiction, and therefore the assumption must be false. So there must be infinitely many primes. Proof (by contradiction):

Divisibility by a Prime Theorem. Any integer n > 1 is divisible by a prime number. Idea of induction. Let n be an integer. If n is a prime number, then we are done. Otherwise, n = ab, both are smaller than n. If a or b is a prime number, then we are done. Otherwise, a = cd, both are smaller than a. If c or d is a prime number, then we are done. Otherwise, repeat this argument, since the numbers are getting smaller and smaller, this will eventually stop and we have found a prime factor of n.

Infinitude of the Primes Theorem. There are infinitely many prime numbers. Claim: if p divides a, then p does not divide a+1. Let p 1, p 2, …, p N be all the primes. Consider p 1 p 2 …p N + 1. Proof (by contradiction): a = cp for some integer c a+1 = dp for some integer d => 1 = (d-c)p, contradiction because p>=2. So, by the claim, none of p 1, p 2, …, p N can divide p 1 p 2 …p N + 1, a contradiction.

This Lecture Direct proof Contrapositive Proof by contradiction Proof by cases

Proof by Cases x is positive or x is negative e.g. want to prove a nonzero number always has a positive square. if x is positive, then x 2 > 0. if x is negative, then x 2 > 0. x 2 > 0.

The Square of an Odd Integer 3 2 = 9 = 8+1, 5 2 = 25 = 3x8+1 …… = = 2145x8 + 1, ……… Idea 1: prove that n 2 – 1 is divisible by 8. Idea 2: consider (2k+1) 2 Idea 0: find counterexample. n 2 – 1 = (n-1)(n+1) = ??… (2k+1) 2 = 4k 2 +4k+1 = 4(k 2 +k)+1 If k is even, then both k 2 and k are even, and so we are done. If k is odd, then both k 2 and k are odd, and so k 2 +k even, also done.

Rational vs Irrational Question: If a and b are irrational, can a b be rational?? We (only) know that √2 is irrational, what about √2 √2 ? Case 1: √2 √2 is rational Then we are done, a=√2, b=√2. Case 2: √2 √2 is irrational Then (√2 √2 ) √2 = √2 2 = 2, a rational number So a=√2 √2, b= √2 will do. So in either case there are a,b irrational and a b be rational. We don’t (need to) know which case is true!

Summary We have learnt different techniques to prove mathematical statements. Direct proof Contrapositive Proof by contradiction Proof by cases Next time we will focus on a very important technique, proof by induction.