Direct Proof
George
E. Hrabovsky, President, MAST
A PDF version of this column is available here.
Editor.
The Column So Far
Here are the columns that have been presented so far:
Column
1: "A New Year" (27 January 2006), where I introduced
the format change and presented the development of the number
system from natural numbers to the rationals.
Column
2: "Math Project #2: How does the consistency requirement
of the number system lead to the real numbers?" (24 February
2006). In this column I fully developed the number system
up to and including complex numbers.
Math Project #3: How we prove a theorem
directly?
Background
One task of any mathematician is to formulate and prove theorems.
If you have developed an idea for a theorem it is called a
conjecture. When
this conjecture is proven it becomes a theorem.
The question becomes, how do you prove such a conjecture to
be true?
The most reliable proof, and usually the most difficult,
is called a direct proof. It is called such because you proceed
directly from the premise of the conjecture to its conclusion
by a sequence of logical arguments. There are no ambiguities,
the flow of logic is relentless and when completed there is
no doubt about the validity of the theorem. It is the most
difficult style because it is so direct. We do not often think
out complicated arguments in such a linear fashion.
Necessary Principles
A mathematical proposition is a mathematical statement that
can be either true of false. We can denote such propositions
by the use of lower case letters
.
Definition 1: Considering both of two propositions is called
a conjunction, .
Sometimes this is called, "and."
Definition 2: Considering either of two propositions is called
a disjunction, .
Sometimes this is called, "or."
Definition 3: Considering a proposition that changes the
truth value of another is called a negation,
.
Sometimes this is called, "not."
Definition 4: The statement if ,
then
is called a conditional
statement. This can be written .
Definition 5: The statement that
is true if and only if
is true is called the biconditional. This can be written
and is equivalent to saying .
Definition 6: Statements that are equivalent have the same
truth value, they are denoted with the symbol .
Rule of Logic 1 (Law of the Excluded Middle): A proposition
is either true or false, .
Rule of Logic 2 (Contrapositive): .
Rule of Logic 3 (Associativity of Conjunction and Disjunction):
If we denote either conjunction or disjunction with the symbol
□, then .
Rule of Logic 4 (Distribution): .
Likewise .
Rule of Logic 5 (De Morgan's Laws):  .
Rule of Logic 6 (Transitivity): .
Rule of Logic 7 (Modus Ponens): .
Rule of Logic 8: .
The Method of Direct Proof
To prove that
we begin by assuming .
Then we have a sequence of logical arguments leading to the
conclusion .
Thus, .
An Example of Direct Proof
Here I choose to give an example from vector algebra. Thus
we have the following additional principles:
Definition 7: A coordinate system is an arbitrary representation
of an n-dimensional space having n perpendicular coordinate
axes.
Definition 8: A real vector is a collection of n ordered
real numbers, each real number corresponding to a coordinate
axis. We write a vector in bold face, thus for the n-dimensional
space we have the vector .
Definition 9: We can add two vectors, = .
We seek to prove that addition of vectors is closed. For
this purpose we say that the vectors belong to a set of vectors
that we will call .
We have two vectors belonging to ,
these vectors are
and .
Our assertion is that
is also an element of .
Since the sum of two vectors is the collection of the sums
of the components, then the task becomes one of showing that
the sums of the components are closed. Since these components
are real numbers by Definition 8, we know that they are closed
by the properties of real numbers (see "Math
Project #2: How does the consistency requirement of the
number system lead to the real numbers?" and "A
New Year," for details).
Since each member of the sum of the two vectors is closed,
then the sum of the two vectors is closed. Thus, we have proven
our theorem.
References
[1] Larry W. Cusack, Direct
Proof,.(2006).
[2] Eric W. Weisstein et al., "Propositional
Calculus" (1999). From MathWorld--A
Wolfram Web Resource.
Created by
Mathematica
(August 1, 2005) 
|