08 November 2002
Existence and Universality
by George E. Hrabovsky, President, MAST
Where We Have Been
In the last column we explored how to construct proofs. We even managed to construct several to show how the system works and to establish the rules of logic under which we are operating.
Where Will We Go in This Column
In this column we will expand upon the proof methods of last column to describe how to consider things in general and in specific.
The Basic Ideas of Existence, Universality, and Uniqueness
In the first column of this series we explored propositional statements and their connectives. In this column we will explore another kind of statement. This statement is neither true nor false until some specific thing is provided. Such a statement is called an open sentence. The specific thing that needs to be specified is called a variable. Only when the variable is specified does the open sentence become a proposition. For example,
![]()
becomes a proposition
only when we specify what x is. Another name for an open sentence is
a predicate. The set of all possible values that the variable can have
is called the universe of discourse. Some values for a variable will
make the predicate true, while others will make it false. The set of all values
from the universe of discourse that make the open sentence true is called the
truth set of the predicate. In our example the truth set has one element,
{2}. We can denote an open sentence whose variable is x with the symbol
.
If we can make the statement
that a truth set is the entire universe of discourse for a given open sentence
then we say that the proposition is universal. We can also state that
for all instances of the variable the open sentence is true. The symbol for
universality is
and means, "For all... ." Thus if we make the statement for all x
then
,
we can write,
![]()
If we can make the statement
that a truth set is nonempty for a given open sentence we say that the variable
exists. The symbol for existence is
and means, "There exists... ." So, if we make the statement that there
exists x such that
,
we can write,
![]()
If we can make the statement
that the truth set contains only one element we say that the variable has a
unique value. Uniqueness is denoted
and means, "There exists a unique... ." Thus if we make the statement
that there exists a unique x such that
,
we can write,
![]()
There are two important theorems about quantifiers that will be important later.
Theorem 4-1:
![]()
Proof:
is true only if
is false. Another way of saying this is that
is true only if there are no elements of the solution set in the universe of
discourse. Another way of saying that is
is true only when the solution set
is nonempty. This is another way of saying
.
Thus the two propositions are equivalent.
Theorem 4-2:
![]()
Proof:
is true only if
is false. Another way of saying this is that
is true only when the solution set is empty. Another way of saying that is the
is true only when there are no elements of the solution set in the universe.
This is another way of saying
.
Thus the two propositions are equivalent.
Proving Existence
The most direct kind
of proof of existence is to specify some element of the universe of discourse
that makes the proposition true. Such a proof is called a constructive proof.
For example, if we state that there exists an even number in the set of counting
numbers from 1 to 10, a constructive proof would be the statement that 2 is
even. A similar approach is to show that there has to be some element of the
universe of discourse that makes the proposition true, instead of showing that
such an element actually exists
Another approach is described by the following steps

This is an application of the reductio ad absurdum approach to proofs.
Proving Universality
To begin with you must
always specify the universe of discourse. Then make the statement that x
is a member of this universe without making any special statements about x.
Then you must show by a series of logical arguments that
is true for x. Since x has no special properties, it is an arbitrary
member of the universe, then the statement
must be true. This is a form of direct proof.
We can also apply reductio ad absurdum,

Counterexamples
Sometimes we need to
prove
.
By theorem 4-1 this is equivalent to
.
If you can find such an instance of x it is termed a counterexample.
Proving Uniqueness
There are two steps
for proving uniqueness. The first is to prove existence by whatever means are
available. Assume two values from the universe of discourse,
and
.
Show that the proposition is true for both. Show by a series of logical arguments
that this implies that
.
Thus there exists a unique x that makes the proposition true.
Suggested Practice Problems
1. Invent three open sets and determine the quantifier that makes them true.
2. Prove the following to be true:
![Theorem 4 - 3 : (∀ x) (∀ y) p(x, y) <==> (∀ y) (∀ x) p(x, y) The ... x) q(x)] Theorem 4 - 8 : (∃ x) (∀ y) p(x, y) ==> (∀ y) (∃ x) p(x, y) .](Images/index_34.gif)
3. Find a counterexample that disproves the following:
![(∃ x) p(x) ==> (∀ x) p(x) (∀ x)[p(x) ∨ q(x)] ==> [(∀ x) p( ... 04; x)[p(x) ==> q(x)] (∀ y) (∃ x) p(x, y) ==> (∃ x) (∀ y) p(x, y) .](Images/index_35.gif)
Converted by Mathematica (November 4, 2002)