Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In logic, proof by contradiction is a form of proof that establishes the truth or the validity of a proposition, by showing that assuming the proposition to be false leads to a contradiction. Although it is quite freely used in mathematical proofs, not every school of mathematical thought accepts this kind of nonconstructive proof as ...
Use the assumption that e = a b to obtain. The first term is an integer, and every fraction in the sum is actually an integer because n ≤ b for each term. Therefore, under the assumption that e is rational, x is an integer. We now prove that 0 < x < 1. First, to prove that x is strictly positive, we insert the above series ...
Constructive proof. In mathematics, a constructive proof is a method of proof that demonstrates the existence of a mathematical object by creating or providing a method for creating the object. This is in contrast to a non-constructive proof (also known as an existence proof or pure existence theorem), which proves the existence of a particular ...
Cantor's diagonal argument (among various similar names [note 1]) is a mathematical proof that there are infinite sets which cannot be put into one-to-one correspondence with the infinite set of natural numbers – informally, that there are sets which in some sense contain more elements than there are positive integers.
Wiles proved the modularity theorem for semistable elliptic curves, from which Fermat’s last theorem follows using proof by contradiction. In this proof method, one assumes the opposite of what is to be proved, and shows if that were true, it would create a contradiction. The contradiction shows that the assumption (that the conclusion is ...
A proof by contrapositive is a direct proof of the contrapositive of a statement. [14] However, indirect methods such as proof by contradiction can also be used with contraposition, as, for example, in the proof of the irrationality of the square root of 2 .
Zeno's arguments may then be early examples of a method of proof called reductio ad absurdum, also known as proof by contradiction. Thus Plato has Zeno say the purpose of the paradoxes "is to show that their hypothesis that existences are many, if properly followed up, leads to still more absurd results than the hypothesis that they are one."
This resolution technique uses proof by contradiction and is based on the fact that any sentence in propositional logic can be transformed into an equivalent sentence in conjunctive normal form. [4] The steps are as follows. All sentences in the knowledge base and the negation of the sentence to be proved (the conjecture) are conjunctively ...