# MATH 55: HOMEWORK #2 SOLUTIONS

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

## Transcription

1 MATH 55: HOMEWORK # SOLUTIONS ERIC PETERSON * 1. SECTION 1.5: NESTED QUANTIFIERS 1.1. Problem Determine the truth value of each of these statements if the domain of each variable consists of all real numbers: (1) x y(x = y): This is true; the rule y = x determines a function, and hence the quantity y exists for any x. () x y(x = y ): This is not true; when x = 1, there is no y with y = x = 1. (3) x y(xy = 0): This is true; x = 0 is a witness, as it has the absorptive property xy = 0 y = 0. (4) x y(x + y y + x): This is false; addition of real numbers is commutative. (5) x(x 0 y(xy = 1)): This is true; for any nonzero x, the assignment y = 1/x has the property xy = x (1/x) = 1. (6) x y(y 0 xy = 1): This is false. If it were true, then there would be an x for which the proposition is true for y = and 3 simultaneously, i.e., x = 1 and 3x = 1. Taking the difference of these two equations, we find x = 3x x = 1 1 = 0, but x y = 0 y = 0 for any y, making our premise absurd. (7) x y(x + y = 1): This is true; set y = 1 x. (8) x y(x +y = x +4y = 5): This is false. Divide the second equation by to get the equivalent equation x + y = 5/. The line it determines is of the same slope as the first equation, but they have distinct y- intercepts, which means that they are parallel and hence never intersect. So, they cannot have a common solution (x, y). (9) x y(x + y = x y = 1): This is true. Solving the linear system yields the witness (x, y) = (1, 1). (10) x y z(z = (x + y)/): This is true; the rule z = (x + y)/ determines a function, and hence the quantity z exists for any x and y. 1.. Problem Rewrite each of these statements so that negations appear only within predicates. (1) y xp(x, y): () x yp(x, y): (3) y(q(y) x R(x, y)): y xp(x, y) y xp(x, y) y y P(x, y). x yp(x, y) x yp(x, y) x y P(x, y). y(q(y) x R(x, y)) y (Q(y) x R(x, y)) y( Q(y) x R(x, y)) y( Q(y) xr(x, y)). * : REPORT MISTAKES TO 1

2 (4) y( xr(x, y) xs(x, y)): y( xr(x, y) xs(x, y)) y ( xr(x, y) xs(x, y)) y( xr(x, y) xs(x, y)) y( x R(x, y) x S(x, y)). (5) y( x zt (x, y, z) x zu (x, y, z)): y( x zt (x, y, z) x zu (x, y, z)) y ( x zt (x, y, z) x zu (x, y, z)) y( x zt (x, y, z) x zu (x, y, z)) y( x zt (x, y, z) x zu (x, y, z)) y( x z T (x, y, z) x z U (x, y, z)) Problem Find a common domain for the variables x, y, and z for which the statement x y((x y) z((z = x) (z = y))) is true and another domain for which it is false. Solution: On the domain D = {a, b} (or D = {a}, or D = ), this statement is true. To prove the implication, we check that the predicate is true in the case that the antecedent is true. If x and y are distinct elements of the domain, as indicated by the antecedent, then one must be a and the other b. Then, any third choice of element z of the domain must also either be equal to a or b, and hence to one of x and y, proving the claim. However, on a domain with more than two elements the claim is false. Set D = {a, b, c}. We exhibit a counterexample by setting x = a, y = b, z = c. It is true that x y, but false that (z = x) (z = y), and hence the implication is false Problem Find a counterexample, if possible, to these universally quantified statements, where the domain for all variables consists of all integers. (1) x y(x = 1/y): This is not true when quantified over the integers. Setting x =, there is no integer 1/ with the property xy = 1. (For the curious, this follows from order properties: since 1 is the smallest positive integer, multiplication by any y with y > 1 has the property that x < xy. We can check that y = 1, y = 0, and y = 1 each do not have the property that xy = 1, and by this other fact, neither can any y with y > 1, since then = x < xy, whereas 1 = 1.) () x y(y x < 100): This is also false. Set x = 100; then as y is a nonnegative value, y x = y will always be at least 100, hence never less than 100. (3) x y(x y 3 ): This, too, is false. For instance, set x = y = 1; then x = 1 = y 3. (More generally, n 6 for any n has both a square- and cube-root, giving candidates for x and y respectively.) 1.5. Problem Express the quantification!xp(x), introduced in Section 1.4, using universal quantifications, existential quantifications, and logical operators. (!xp(x)) (( xp(x)) ( x y((p(x) P(y)) (x = y)).. 1.6: RULES OF INFERENCE.1. Problem Show that the argument form with premises ( p t) (r s), q (u t), u p, and s and conclusion q r is valid first by checking a truth-table and then by using the rules of inference. Solution: Because we are checking the validity of an implication, we need only check that when its antecedent is true (q), then so is its predicate (r ). By assumption, all the premises are valid implications, and hence if q is true, then the second premise requires that u t be true, i.e., that u is true and t is true. If u is true, then the third premise implies that p is true. Since both p and t are true, the first premise implies that r s is true. Since the final premise asserts that s is true, it must be that r is true, which is the desired conclusion.

3 In terms of inference rules, we can build the following proof tree: u p q u t u t p q p t p t r s q r s s q r... Problem Identify the error or errors in this argument that supposedly shows that if x(p(x) Q(x)) is true that xp(x) xq(x) is true: 1. x(p(x) Q(x)) Premise. P(c) Q(c) Universal instantiation from 1 3. P(c) Simplification from 4. xp(x) Universal generalization from 3 5. Q(c) Simplification from 6. xq(x) Universal generalization from 5 7. x(p(x) xq(x)) Conjuncation from 4 and 6. Solution: There are three errors. First, simplification is the rule ( p q) p; the rule does not apply to. This causes an error on lines 3 and 5. Finally, the conjunction rule is misapplied on the final line look closely at the placement of the parentheses..3. Problem Use rules of inference to show that if x(p(x) Q(x)) and x(( P(x) Q(x)) R(x)) are true, then x( R(x) P(x)) is also true, where the domains of all quantifiers are the same. x(p(x) Q(x)) P(c) Q(c) P(c) Q(c) P(c) R(c) x(( P(x) Q(x)) R(x)) P(c) Q(c) R(c) R(c) P(c) for a general c x( R(x) P(x))..4. Problem The Logic Problem, taken from WFF N PROOF, The Game of Logic, has these two assumptions: (1) Logic is not difficult or not many students like logic. () If mathematics is easy, then logic is not difficult. We will denote by p the proposition logic is not difficult, by q the proposition not many students like logic, and by r the proposition mathematics is easy. The premises then take the form r p and p q (which is equivalent to p q). Determine whether each of the following are valid conclusions of these assumptions: (1) That mathematics is not easy, if many students like logic. This is equivalent to q r. This is a valid syllogysm of p r and q p, using the contrapositives of the premises. () That not many students like logic, if mathematics is not easy. This is equivalent to r q, which is not a valid syllogysm of the above premises. (3) That mathematics is not easy or logic is difficult. This is equivalent to r p r p. This is the negation of one of the above premises and not a valid syllogysm of them. (4) That logic is not difficult or mathematics is not easy. This is equivalent to p r r p, which is one of the above premises. (5) That if not many students like logic, then either mathematics is not easy or logic is not difficult. This is equivalent to q ( r p), which is valid. Namely, the conclusion r p can be interpreted as the implication r p, which is one of our hypotheses. Conjunction says that q (r p) follows from r p alone. 3

4 3. 1.7: INTRODUCTION TO PROOFS 3.1. Problem Prove that if n is a perfect square, then n + is not a perfect square. Proof: Suppose that n = x and n + = y, with both x and y nonnegative naturals. We know a formula for the difference of squares: (n + ) (n) = x y = (x y)(x + y). Since is a prime number, one of these factors must be and the other must be 1. Since both x and y are assumed nonnegative, it must be that x + y > x y, so x y = 1 and x + y =. This system does not have a solution over the naturals: the first equation begets the substitution x = 1+ y, which transforms the second into x + y = (1+ y)+ y = 1 + y =. Whenever y is an integer, this middle expression is an odd number, and hence can never be equal to. So, we must have been wrong all along: there can be no pair of perfect squares whose difference is two. Another argument (which is also a proof by contradiction) proceeds by noting that if n = x and n + = y, with both x and y nonnegative naturals, then n + (x + 1), because any perfect square greater than x must be at least (x + 1). This gives n + (x + 1) = x + x + 1 = n + x + 1, and hence x + 1. Because x is a natural number, this is only possible if x = 0 and hence n = 0, but in this case we have = n + = y, which is impossible. So, again we must have been wrong all along: there can be no pair of perfect squares whose difference is two. 3.. Problem Prove that if m and n are integers and mn is even, then m is even or n is even. Proof: Suppose that m and n are both odd; we will work to show that mn is also odd. Suppose first that it s not. In that case, divides it, and because is a prime number, it must divide at least one of the two factors m and n. However, these were assumed to be odd (i.e., indivisible by ), and so this cannot be the case. Hence, mn must be odd. (Note: you don t need to go through contradiction to prove this statement, but it does make it shorter. You re encouraged to write a proof that doesn t use contradiction to see that it can be done.) 3.3. Problem Show that these three statements are equivalent, where a and b are real numbers: (1) a is less than b. () The average of a and b is greater than a. (3) The average of a and b is less than b. Proof: We will show that 1 and are equivalent, then that 1 and 3 are equivalent. Consider the following sequence of inequalities: a < b a + a < a + b a + a < a + b (Initial assumption.) (Add a to both sides.) (Divide both sides by.) a < a + b. (Simplify the left.) This shows that 1 implies. To show that implies 1, read the same proof backwards all the steps involved are reversible. The equivalence between 1 and 3 can be shown be a similar sequence: a < b a + b < b + b (Initial assumption.) (Add b to both sides.) a + b < b + b (Divide both sides by.) a + b < b. (Simplify the right.) 4

5 3.4. Problem Show that the propositions p 1, p, p 3, and p 4 can be shown to be equivalent by showing that p 1 p 4, p p 3, and p 1 p 3. Proof: Biimplications have the property that a b and b c imply a c, and that a b is equivalent to b a. To show that all these propositions are equivalent, we need to check that p i p j for each choice of i < j. p 1 p : This follows from p 1 p 3, the last premise, and p 3 p, the second premise. p 1 p 3 : This is the third premise. p 1 p 4 : This is the first premise. p p 3 : This is the second premise. p p 4 : This follows from joining p p 1 (see earlier in this list) with the first premise p 1 p 4 to form p p 4. p 3 p 4 : This follows from joining the last premise p 3 p 1 with the first premise p 1 p 4 to form p 3 p 4. (Note: In general, draw a picture with a dot representing each proposition p i and a line connecting the dot p i to the dot p j for each premise p i p j. If the picture cannot be separated into two connected parts, then all the propositions are equivalent.) : PROOF METHODS AND STRATEGY 4.1. Problem Use a proof by cases to show that min(a, min(b, c)) = min(min(a, b), c) whenever a, b, and c are real numbers. Proof: There are six cases. a b c: min(a,min(b, c)) = min(a, b) = a. min(min(a, b), c) = min(a, c) = a. a c b: min(a,min(b, c)) = min(a, c) = a. min(min(a, b), c) = min(a, c) = a. b a c: min(a,min(b, c)) = min(a, b) = b. min(min(a, b), c) = min(b, c) = b. b c a: min(a,min(b, c)) = min(a, b) = b. min(min(a, b), c) = min(b, c) = b. c a b: min(a,min(b, c)) = min(a, c) = c. min(min(a, b), c) = min(a, c) = c. c b a: min(a,min(b, c)) = min(a, c) = c. min(min(a, b), c) = min(b, c) = c. 4.. Problem Prove that either or is not a perfect square. Is your proof constructive or nonconstructive? Proof: We can re-use the proof given earlier in these solutions. Assume that they are both perfect squares: then the first can be expressed as x and the second as y for distinct positive integers x and y. We then consider their difference: ( ) ( ) = y x 1 = (y x)(y + x). Since the only positive factors of 1 are 1 itself, it must simultaneously be the case that y x = 1 and y + x = 1. This is not possible, and hence both numbers cannot be perfect squares. This proof is nonconstructive a constructive proof would produce a factorization of one of the numbers and check that it, indeed, is not a perfect square. Mathematica helpfully provided such a factorization of : = Since not all the factors appear an even number of times (3 3, for instance), this number is not a perfect square Problem Suppose that five ones and four zeroes are arranged around a circle. Between any two equal bits you insert a 0 and and between any two unequal bits you insert a 1 to produce nine new bits. Then you erase the nine original bits. Show that when you iterate this procedure, you can never get nine zeroes. Proof: To ease typesetting, I ll write strings of numbers rather than loops of them. The idea is to construct what the previous stage 5

6 must have been, given the result of such an iteration. Suppose that we ve ended up the string In this case, the previous string must have all consisted of identical numbers, i.e., either or We are already in the process of analyzing the first case, so we will turn our attention to the second. In this case, the string preceding must have consisted entirely of alternating digits. In particular, there must have been some digit i which was a 1 we will write this as our first digit, which is allowed because we can always rotate the ring of numbers (and hence the digits in our string). The string must then look like: but, up to rotation, this is the same string as Since the last two digits are identical, it s not possible to form a string with all alternating digits to produce Hence, the only way to produce the string is to begin with it or with there can be no further history. Since we begin with a nonzero number of both 0 and 1 digits, we cannot be in this case, and hence cannot reach

### Predicate Logic. Example: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Socrates is mortal.

Predicate Logic Example: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Socrates is mortal. Note: We need logic laws that work for statements involving quantities like some and all. In English, the predicate is

Mathematics 0N1 Solutions 1 1. Write the following sets in list form. 1(i) The set of letters in the word banana. {a, b, n}. 1(ii) {x : x 2 + 3x 10 = 0}. 3(iv) C A. True 3(v) B = {e, e, f, c}. True 3(vi)

### Propositional Logic. A proposition is a declarative sentence (a sentence that declares a fact) that is either true or false, but not both.

irst Order Logic Propositional Logic A proposition is a declarative sentence (a sentence that declares a fact) that is either true or false, but not both. Are the following sentences propositions? oronto

### Review Name Rule of Inference

CS311H: Discrete Mathematics Review Name Rule of Inference Modus ponens φ 2 φ 2 Modus tollens φ 2 φ 2 Inference Rules for Quantifiers Işıl Dillig Hypothetical syllogism Or introduction Or elimination And

### Inference Rules and Proof Methods

Inference Rules and Proof Methods Winter 2010 Introduction Rules of Inference and Formal Proofs Proofs in mathematics are valid arguments that establish the truth of mathematical statements. An argument

### Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof. CSE 215, Foundations of Computer Science Stony Brook University http://www.cs.stonybrook.

Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof CSE 215, Foundations of Computer Science Stony Brook University http://www.cs.stonybrook.edu/~cse215 1 Number theory Properties: 2 Properties of integers (whole

### The Foundations: Logic and Proofs. Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs

The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs Rules of Inference Section 1.6 Section Summary Valid Arguments Inference Rules for Propositional Logic Using Rules of Inference to Build Arguments

### 2. Methods of Proof Types of Proofs. Suppose we wish to prove an implication p q. Here are some strategies we have available to try.

2. METHODS OF PROOF 69 2. Methods of Proof 2.1. Types of Proofs. Suppose we wish to prove an implication p q. Here are some strategies we have available to try. Trivial Proof: If we know q is true then

### 1.4/1.5 Predicates and Quantifiers

1.4/1.5 Predicates and Quantifiers Can we express the following statement in propositional logic? Every computer has a CPU No Outline: Predicates Quantifiers Domain of Predicate Translation: Natural Languauge

### 1.4 Predicates and Quantifiers

Can we express the following statement in propositional logic? Every computer has a CPU No 1 Can we express the following statement in propositional logic? No Every computer has a CPU Let's see the new

### Chapter I Logic and Proofs

MATH 1130 1 Discrete Structures Chapter I Logic and Proofs Propositions A proposition is a statement that is either true (T) or false (F), but or both. s Propositions: 1. I am a man.. I am taller than

### Predicate Logic. Lucia Moura. Winter Predicates and Quantifiers Nested Quantifiers Using Predicate Calculus

Predicate Logic Winter 2010 Predicates A Predicate is a declarative sentence whose true/false value depends on one or more variables. The statement x is greater than 3 has two parts: the subject: x is

### 3. Predicates and Quantifiers

3. PREDICATES AND QUANTIFIERS 45 3. Predicates and Quantifiers 3.1. Predicates and Quantifiers. Definition 3.1.1. A predicate or propositional function is a description of the property (or properties)

### DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 4

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 4 DR. DANIEL FREEMAN 1. Chapter 3.1 Predicates and Quantified Statements I A predicate is a sentence that contains a finite number of variables and becomes a statement when specific

### CSI 2101 / Rules of Inference ( 1.5)

CSI 2101 / Rules of Inference ( 1.5) Introduction what is a proof? Valid arguments in Propositional Logic equivalence of quantified expressions Rules of Inference in Propositional Logic the rules using

### Even Number: An integer n is said to be even if it has the form n = 2k for some integer k. That is, n is even if and only if n divisible by 2.

MATH 337 Proofs Dr. Neal, WKU This entire course requires you to write proper mathematical proofs. All proofs should be written elegantly in a formal mathematical style. Complete sentences of explanation

### Proof: A logical argument establishing the truth of the theorem given the truth of the axioms and any previously proven theorems.

Math 232 - Discrete Math 2.1 Direct Proofs and Counterexamples Notes Axiom: Proposition that is assumed to be true. Proof: A logical argument establishing the truth of the theorem given the truth of the

### CS 2336 Discrete Mathematics

CS 2336 Discrete Mathematics Lecture 2 Logic: Predicate Calculus 1 Outline Predicates Quantifiers Binding Applications Logical Equivalences 2 Predicates In mathematics arguments, we will often see sentences

### INTRODUCTION TO PROOFS: HOMEWORK SOLUTIONS

INTRODUCTION TO PROOFS: HOMEWORK SOLUTIONS STEVEN HEILMAN Contents 1. Homework 1 1 2. Homework 2 6 3. Homework 3 10 4. Homework 4 16 5. Homework 5 19 6. Homework 6 21 7. Homework 7 25 8. Homework 8 28

### 1.5 Methods of Proof INTRODUCTION

1.5 Methods of Proof INTRODUCTION Icon 0049 Two important questions that arise in the study of mathematics are: (1) When is a mathematical argument correct? (2) What methods can be used to construct mathematical

### LOGICAL INFERENCE & PROOFs. Debdeep Mukhopadhyay Dept of CSE, IIT Madras

LOGICAL INFERENCE & PROOFs Debdeep Mukhopadhyay Dept of CSE, IIT Madras Defn A theorem is a mathematical assertion which can be shown to be true. A proof is an argument which establishes the truth of a

### Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere.

Chapter 3 Predicate Logic Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere. A. Einstein In the previous chapter, we studied propositional logic. This chapter is dedicated to another

### 3.3 Proofs Involving Quantifiers

3.3 Proofs Involving Quantifiers 1. In exercise 6 of Section 2.2 you use logical equivalences to show that x(p (x) Q(x)) is equivalent to xp (x) xq(x). Now use the methods of this section to prove that

### CHAPTER 2. Inequalities

CHAPTER 2 Inequalities In this section we add the axioms describe the behavior of inequalities (the order axioms) to the list of axioms begun in Chapter 1. A thorough mastery of this section is essential

### DISCRETE MATHEMATICS W W L CHEN

DISCRETE MATHEMATICS W W L CHEN c W W L Chen, 1982, 2008. This chapter originates from material used by the author at Imperial College, University of London, between 1981 and 1990. It is available free

### 1.3 Induction and Other Proof Techniques

4CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTORY MATERIAL: SETS, FUNCTIONS AND MATHEMATICAL INDU 1.3 Induction and Other Proof Techniques The purpose of this section is to study the proof technique known as mathematical induction.

### Handout #1: Mathematical Reasoning

Math 101 Rumbos Spring 2010 1 Handout #1: Mathematical Reasoning 1 Propositional Logic A proposition is a mathematical statement that it is either true or false; that is, a statement whose certainty or

### CS 441 Discrete Mathematics for CS Lecture 5. Predicate logic. CS 441 Discrete mathematics for CS. Negation of quantifiers

CS 441 Discrete Mathematics for CS Lecture 5 Predicate logic Milos Hauskrecht milos@cs.pitt.edu 5329 Sennott Square Negation of quantifiers English statement: Nothing is perfect. Translation: x Perfect(x)

### Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2009 Satish Rao, David Tse Note 2

CS 70 Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2009 Satish Rao, David Tse Note 2 Proofs Intuitively, the concept of proof should already be familiar We all like to assert things, and few of us

### Discrete Mathematics, Chapter : Predicate Logic

Discrete Mathematics, Chapter 1.4-1.5: Predicate Logic Richard Mayr University of Edinburgh, UK Richard Mayr (University of Edinburgh, UK) Discrete Mathematics. Chapter 1.4-1.5 1 / 23 Outline 1 Predicates

### Logic, Sets, and Proofs

Logic, Sets, and Proofs David A. Cox and Catherine C. McGeoch Amherst College 1 Logic Logical Statements. A logical statement is a mathematical statement that is either true or false. Here we denote logical

### CSI 2101 Discrete Structures Winter 2012

CSI 2101 Discrete Structures Winter 2012 Prof. Lucia Moura University of Ottawa Homework Assignment #1 (100 points, weight 5%) Due: Thursday Feb 9, at 1:00 p.m. (in lecture); assignments with lateness

### Logic and Proofs. Chapter 1

Section 1.0 1.0.1 Chapter 1 Logic and Proofs 1.1 Propositional Logic 1.2 Propositional Equivalences 1.3 Predicates and Quantifiers 1.4 Nested Quantifiers 1.5 Rules of Inference 1.6 Introduction to Proofs

### Indiana State Core Curriculum Standards updated 2009 Algebra I

Indiana State Core Curriculum Standards updated 2009 Algebra I Strand Description Boardworks High School Algebra presentations Operations With Real Numbers Linear Equations and A1.1 Students simplify and

### Section 1. Statements and Truth Tables. Definition 1.1: A mathematical statement is a declarative sentence that is true or false, but not both.

M3210 Supplemental Notes: Basic Logic Concepts In this course we will examine statements about mathematical concepts and relationships between these concepts (definitions, theorems). We will also consider

### Quantifiers are used to describe variables in statements. - The universal quantifier means for all. - The existential quantifier means there exists.

11 Quantifiers are used to describe variables in statements. - The universal quantifier means for all. - The existential quantifier means there exists. The phrases, for all x in R if x is an arbitrary

### 3. Mathematical Induction

3. MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION 83 3. Mathematical Induction 3.1. First Principle of Mathematical Induction. Let P (n) be a predicate with domain of discourse (over) the natural numbers N = {0, 1,,...}. If (1)

### Problems on Discrete Mathematics 1

Problems on Discrete Mathematics 1 Chung-Chih Li 2 Kishan Mehrotra 3 L A TEX at July 18, 2007 1 No part of this book can be reproduced without permission from the authors 2 Illinois State University, Normal,

### Mathematics for Computer Science/Software Engineering. Notes for the course MSM1F3 Dr. R. A. Wilson

Mathematics for Computer Science/Software Engineering Notes for the course MSM1F3 Dr. R. A. Wilson October 1996 Chapter 1 Logic Lecture no. 1. We introduce the concept of a proposition, which is a statement

### Example. Statements in Predicate Logic. Predicate Logic. Predicate Logic. (Rosen, Chapter ) P(x,y) TOPICS. Predicate Logic

Predicate Logic Predicate Logic (Rosen, Chapter 1.4-1.6) TOPICS Predicate Logic Quantifiers Logical Equivalence Predicate Proofs n Some statements cannot be expressed in propositional logic, such as: n

### The last three chapters introduced three major proof techniques: direct,

CHAPTER 7 Proving Non-Conditional Statements The last three chapters introduced three major proof techniques: direct, contrapositive and contradiction. These three techniques are used to prove statements

### Predicates and Quantifiers. Niloufar Shafiei

Predicates and Quantifiers Niloufar Shafiei Review Proposition: 1. It is a sentence that declares a fact. 2. It is either true or false, but not both. Examples: 2 + 1 = 3. True Proposition Toronto is the

### What is logic? Propositional Logic. Negation. Propositions. This is a contentious question! We will play it safe, and stick to:

Propositional Logic This lecture marks the start of a new section of the course. In the last few lectures, we have had to reason formally about concepts. This lecture introduces the mathematical language

### Predicate in English. Predicates and Quantifiers. Propositional Functions: Prelude. Predicate in Logic. Propositional Function

Predicates and Quantifiers By Chuck Cusack Predicate in English In English, a sentence has 2 parts: the subject and the predicate. The predicate is the part of the sentence that states something about

### Section 7.1 First-Order Predicate Calculus predicate Existential Quantifier Universal Quantifier.

Section 7.1 First-Order Predicate Calculus Predicate calculus studies the internal structure of sentences where subjects are applied to predicates existentially or universally. A predicate describes a

MA 134 Lecture Notes August 20, 2012 Introduction The purpose of this lecture is to... Introduction The purpose of this lecture is to... Learn about different types of equations Introduction The purpose

### 31 is a prime number is a mathematical statement (which happens to be true).

Chapter 1 Mathematical Logic In its most basic form, Mathematics is the practice of assigning truth to welldefined statements. In this course, we will develop the skills to use known true statements to

### def: An axiom is a statement that is assumed to be true, or in the case of a mathematical system, is used to specify the system.

Section 1.5 Methods of Proof 1.5.1 1.5 METHODS OF PROOF Some forms of argument ( valid ) never lead from correct statements to an incorrect. Some other forms of argument ( fallacies ) can lead from true

### 1 Proposition, Logical connectives and compound statements

Discrete Mathematics: Lecture 4 Introduction to Logic Instructor: Arijit Bishnu Date: July 27, 2009 1 Proposition, Logical connectives and compound statements Logic is the discipline that deals with the

### Math 55: Discrete Mathematics

Math 55: Discrete Mathematics UC Berkeley, Fall 2011 Homework # 5, due Wednesday, February 22 5.1.4 Let P (n) be the statement that 1 3 + 2 3 + + n 3 = (n(n + 1)/2) 2 for the positive integer n. a) What

### Exam 1 Answers: Logic and Proof

Q250 FALL 2012, INDIANA UNIVERSITY Exam 1 Answers: Logic and Proof September 17, 2012 Instructions: Please answer each question completely, and show all of your work. Partial credit will be awarded where

### Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic. With Question/Answer Animations

Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations Summary Predicate Logic (First-Order Logic (FOL) The Language of Quantifiers Logical Equivalences Nested Quantifiers Translation from

### Solutions to Homework 6 Mathematics 503 Foundations of Mathematics Spring 2014

Solutions to Homework 6 Mathematics 503 Foundations of Mathematics Spring 2014 3.4: 1. If m is any integer, then m(m + 1) = m 2 + m is the product of m and its successor. That it to say, m 2 + m is the

### 0 ( x) 2 = ( x)( x) = (( 1)x)(( 1)x) = ((( 1)x))( 1))x = ((( 1)(x( 1)))x = ((( 1)( 1))x)x = (1x)x = xx = x 2.

SOLUTION SET FOR THE HOMEWORK PROBLEMS Page 5. Problem 8. Prove that if x and y are real numbers, then xy x + y. Proof. First we prove that if x is a real number, then x 0. The product of two positive

### PUTNAM TRAINING POLYNOMIALS. Exercises 1. Find a polynomial with integral coefficients whose zeros include 2 + 5.

PUTNAM TRAINING POLYNOMIALS (Last updated: November 17, 2015) Remark. This is a list of exercises on polynomials. Miguel A. Lerma Exercises 1. Find a polynomial with integral coefficients whose zeros include

### Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2009 Satish Rao, David Tse Note 1

CS 70 Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2009 Satish Rao, David Tse Note 1 Course Outline CS70 is a course on Discrete Mathematics and Probability for EECS Students. The purpose of the course

### Midterm Examination 1 with Solutions - Math 574, Frank Thorne Thursday, February 9, 2012

Midterm Examination 1 with Solutions - Math 574, Frank Thorne (thorne@math.sc.edu) Thursday, February 9, 2012 1. (3 points each) For each sentence below, say whether it is logically equivalent to the sentence

### Chapter Three. Functions. In this section, we study what is undoubtedly the most fundamental type of relation used in mathematics.

Chapter Three Functions 3.1 INTRODUCTION In this section, we study what is undoubtedly the most fundamental type of relation used in mathematics. Definition 3.1: Given sets X and Y, a function from X to

### All programs that passed test 1 were written in Java.

. Consider the following statements: (S) Programs that passed test also passed test. (S) Programs passed test unless they failed test. (S) Programs passed test only if they passed test. (a) Rewrite statements

### Chapter 1. Logic and Proof

Chapter 1. Logic and Proof 1.1 Remark: A little over 100 years ago, it was found that some mathematical proofs contained paradoxes, and these paradoxes could be used to prove statements that were known

### CHAPTER 1 The Foundations: Logic and Proof, Sets, and Functions

Section 1.5 Methods of Proof 1 CHAPTER 1 The Foundations: Logic and Proof, Sets, and Functions SECTION 1.5 Methods of Proof Learning to construct good mathematical proofs takes years. There is no algorithm

### 0.8 Rational Expressions and Equations

96 Prerequisites 0.8 Rational Expressions and Equations We now turn our attention to rational expressions - that is, algebraic fractions - and equations which contain them. The reader is encouraged to

### Math 3000 Running Glossary

Math 3000 Running Glossary Last Updated on: July 15, 2014 The definition of items marked with a must be known precisely. Chapter 1: 1. A set: A collection of objects called elements. 2. The empty set (

### Logical Inference and Mathematical Proof

Logical Inference and Mathematical Proof CSE 191, Class Note 03: Logical Inference and Mathematical Proof Computer Sci & Eng Dept SUNY Buffalo c Xin He (University at Buffalo) CSE 191 Discrete Structures

### Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof. Harper Langston New York University

Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof Harper Langston New York University Proof and Counterexample Discovery and proof Even and odd numbers number n from Z is called

### CHAPTER 3. Methods of Proofs. 1. Logical Arguments and Formal Proofs

CHAPTER 3 Methods of Proofs 1. Logical Arguments and Formal Proofs 1.1. Basic Terminology. An axiom is a statement that is given to be true. A rule of inference is a logical rule that is used to deduce

### Chapter 1 LOGIC AND PROOF

Chapter 1 LOGIC AND PROOF To be able to understand mathematics and mathematical arguments, it is necessary to have a solid understanding of logic and the way in which known facts can be combined to prove

### Reading 7 : Program Correctness

CS/Math 240: Introduction to Discrete Mathematics Fall 2015 Instructors: Beck Hasti, Gautam Prakriya Reading 7 : Program Correctness 7.1 Program Correctness Showing that a program is correct means that

### n logical not (negation) n logical or (disjunction) n logical and (conjunction) n logical exclusive or n logical implication (conditional)

Discrete Math Review Discrete Math Review (Rosen, Chapter 1.1 1.6) TOPICS Propositional Logic Logical Operators Truth Tables Implication Logical Equivalence Inference Rules What you should know about propositional

### Chapter 1 Basic Number Concepts

Draft of September 2014 Chapter 1 Basic Number Concepts 1.1. Introduction No problems in this section. 1.2. Factors and Multiples 1. Determine whether the following numbers are divisible by 3, 9, and 11:

### Math 317 HW #5 Solutions

Math 317 HW #5 Solutions 1. Exercise 2.4.2. (a) Prove that the sequence defined by x 1 = 3 and converges. x n+1 = 1 4 x n Proof. I intend to use the Monotone Convergence Theorem, so my goal is to show

### CSE 191, Class Note 01 Propositional Logic Computer Sci & Eng Dept SUNY Buffalo

Propositional Logic CSE 191, Class Note 01 Propositional Logic Computer Sci & Eng Dept SUNY Buffalo c Xin He (University at Buffalo) CSE 191 Discrete Structures 1 / 37 Discrete Mathematics What is Discrete

### Logic and Proof Solutions. Question 1

Logic and Proof Solutions Question 1 Which of the following are true, and which are false? For the ones which are true, give a proof. For the ones which are false, give a counterexample. (a) x is an odd

### Finish Set Theory Nested Quantifiers

Finish Set Theory Nested Quantifiers Margaret M. Fleck 18 February 2009 This lecture does a final couple examples of set theory proofs. It then fills in material on quantifiers, especially nested ones,

### 3.3. INFERENCE 105. Table 3.5: Another look at implication. p q p q T T T T F F F T T F F T

3.3. INFERENCE 105 3.3 Inference Direct Inference (Modus Ponens) and Proofs We concluded our last section with a proof that the sum of two even numbers is even. That proof contained several crucial ingredients.

### 22C:19 Discrete Math. So. What is it? Why discrete math? Fall 2009 Hantao Zhang

22C:19 Discrete Math Fall 2009 Hantao Zhang So. What is it? Discrete mathematics is the study of mathematical structures that are fundamentally discrete, in the sense of not supporting or requiring the

### Math 3000 Section 003 Intro to Abstract Math Homework 2

Math 3000 Section 003 Intro to Abstract Math Homework 2 Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences University of Colorado Denver, Spring 2012 Solutions (February 13, 2012) Please note that these

### Algebra I. In this technological age, mathematics is more important than ever. When students

In this technological age, mathematics is more important than ever. When students leave school, they are more and more likely to use mathematics in their work and everyday lives operating computer equipment,

### ALGEBRA HANDOUT 2: IDEALS AND QUOTIENTS. 1. Ideals in Commutative Rings In this section all groups and rings will be commutative.

ALGEBRA HANDOUT 2: IDEALS AND QUOTIENTS PETE L. CLARK 1. Ideals in Commutative Rings In this section all groups and rings will be commutative. 1.1. Basic definitions and examples. Let R be a (commutative!)

### MATH Fundamental Mathematics II.

MATH 10032 Fundamental Mathematics II http://www.math.kent.edu/ebooks/10032/fun-math-2.pdf Department of Mathematical Sciences Kent State University December 29, 2008 2 Contents 1 Fundamental Mathematics

### Invalidity in Predicate Logic

Invalidity in Predicate Logic So far we ve got a method for establishing that a predicate logic argument is valid: do a derivation. But we ve got no method for establishing invalidity. In propositional

### Oh Yeah? Well, Prove It.

Oh Yeah? Well, Prove It. MT 43A - Abstract Algebra Fall 009 A large part of mathematics consists of building up a theoretical framework that allows us to solve problems. This theoretical framework is built

### It is time to prove some theorems. There are various strategies for doing

CHAPTER 4 Direct Proof It is time to prove some theorems. There are various strategies for doing this; we now examine the most straightforward approach, a technique called direct proof. As we begin, it

### Mathematical Induction. Lecture 10-11

Mathematical Induction Lecture 10-11 Menu Mathematical Induction Strong Induction Recursive Definitions Structural Induction Climbing an Infinite Ladder Suppose we have an infinite ladder: 1. We can reach

### Problems on Discrete Mathematics 1

Problems on Discrete Mathematics 1 Chung-Chih Li 2 Kishan Mehrotra 3 Syracuse University, New York L A TEX at January 11, 2007 (Part I) 1 No part of this book can be reproduced without permission from

### Propositional Logic and Methods of Inference SEEM

Propositional Logic and Methods of Inference SEEM 5750 1 Logic Knowledge can also be represented by the symbols of logic, which is the study of the rules of exact reasoning. Logic is also of primary importance

### Definition 10. A proposition is a statement either true or false, but not both.

Chapter 2 Propositional Logic Contrariwise, continued Tweedledee, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn t, it ain t. That s logic. (Lewis Carroll, Alice s Adventures

### 3. Recurrence Recursive Definitions. To construct a recursively defined function:

3. RECURRENCE 10 3. Recurrence 3.1. Recursive Definitions. To construct a recursively defined function: 1. Initial Condition(s) (or basis): Prescribe initial value(s) of the function.. Recursion: Use a

### MATH 10034 Fundamental Mathematics IV

MATH 0034 Fundamental Mathematics IV http://www.math.kent.edu/ebooks/0034/funmath4.pdf Department of Mathematical Sciences Kent State University January 2, 2009 ii Contents To the Instructor v Polynomials.

### 2. Propositional Equivalences

2. PROPOSITIONAL EQUIVALENCES 33 2. Propositional Equivalences 2.1. Tautology/Contradiction/Contingency. Definition 2.1.1. A tautology is a proposition that is always true. Example 2.1.1. p p Definition

### Symbolic Logic. 1. Consider the following statements:

Symbolic Logic 1. Consider the following statements: (S1) Programs that passed test 1 also passed test 2. (S2) Programs passed test 2 unless they failed test 1. (S3) Programs passed test 2 only if they

### Undergraduate Notes in Mathematics. Arkansas Tech University Department of Mathematics. Introductory Notes in Discrete Mathematics

Undergraduate Notes in Mathematics Arkansas Tech University Department of Mathematics Introductory Notes in Discrete Mathematics Marcel B. Finan c All Rights Reserved Last Updated April 6, 2016 Preface

### San Jose Math Circle October 17, 2009 ARITHMETIC AND GEOMETRIC PROGRESSIONS

San Jose Math Circle October 17, 2009 ARITHMETIC AND GEOMETRIC PROGRESSIONS DEFINITION. An arithmetic progression is a (finite or infinite) sequence of numbers with the property that the difference between

### (Refer Slide Time: 05:02)

Discrete Mathematical Structures Dr. Kamala Krithivasan Department of Computer Science and Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras Lecture - 1 Propositional Logic This course is about discrete

### Appendix F: Mathematical Induction

Appendix F: Mathematical Induction Introduction In this appendix, you will study a form of mathematical proof called mathematical induction. To see the logical need for mathematical induction, take another

### Chapter 3. Cartesian Products and Relations. 3.1 Cartesian Products

Chapter 3 Cartesian Products and Relations The material in this chapter is the first real encounter with abstraction. Relations are very general thing they are a special type of subset. After introducing

### Induction. Mathematical Induction. Induction. Induction. Induction. Induction. 29 Sept 2015

Mathematical If we have a propositional function P(n), and we want to prove that P(n) is true for any natural number n, we do the following: Show that P(0) is true. (basis step) We could also start at

### Mathematical Induction

Chapter 2 Mathematical Induction 2.1 First Examples Suppose we want to find a simple formula for the sum of the first n odd numbers: 1 + 3 + 5 +... + (2n 1) = n (2k 1). How might we proceed? The most natural