Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In this general sense, proof by contradiction is also known as indirect proof, proof by assuming the opposite, [2] and reductio ad impossibile. [3] A mathematical proof employing proof by contradiction usually proceeds as follows: The proposition to be proved is P. We assume P to be false, i.e., we assume ¬P. It is then shown that ¬P implies ...
This contradiction, as opposed to metaphysical thinking, is not an objectively impossible thing, because these contradicting forces exist in objective reality, not cancelling each other out, but actually defining each other's existence. According to Marxist theory, such a contradiction can be found, for example, in the fact that:
In mathematics, a proof by infinite descent, also known as Fermat's method of descent, is a particular kind of proof by contradiction [1] used to show that a statement cannot possibly hold for any number, by showing that if the statement were to hold for a number, then the same would be true for a smaller number, leading to an infinite descent and ultimately a contradiction. [2]
The definition of a formal proof is intended to capture the concept of proofs as written in the practice of mathematics. The soundness of this definition amounts to the belief that a published proof can, in principle, be converted into a formal proof. However, outside the field of automated proof assistants, this is rarely done in practice.
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. By the definition of a rational number , the statement can be made that " If 2 {\displaystyle {\sqrt {2}}} is rational, then it can be expressed as an irreducible fraction ".
In mathematics, a contraction mapping, or contraction or contractor, on a metric space (M, d) is a function f from M to itself, with the property that there is some real number < such that for all x and y in M, ((), ()) (,).
Further, since set theory was seen as the basis for an axiomatic development of all other branches of mathematics, Russell's paradox threatened the foundations of mathematics as a whole. This motivated a great deal of research around the turn of the 20th century to develop a consistent (contradiction-free) set theory.
An infimum of a set is always and only defined relative to a superset of the set in question. For example, there is no infimum of the positive real numbers inside the positive real numbers (as their own superset), nor any infimum of the positive real numbers inside the complex numbers with positive real part.