0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)

23 visualizzazioni14 pagineSep 19, 2012

© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

PDF, TXT o leggi online da Scribd

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)

23 visualizzazioni14 pagineAttribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Sei sulla pagina 1di 14

MAST217 INTRODUCTION TO MATHEMATICAL THINKING COURSE NOTES AND PROBLEMS These notes are based on my own experience as a student struggling with writing mathematical proofs and as a university professor struggling to help students understand and produce mathematical proofs, and on my readings of several notes and books written by mathematicians about the nature of mathematical proofs and propositional logic, and about how to teach these to undergraduate students.

Note: this is the first draft of these notes I would appreciate if you point out to me any errors (grammatical, typographical, mathematical) that you find.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION SOME FORMAL LOGIC 1.1 PROPOSITIONS AND LOGICAL OPERATORS 1.2 TRUTH TABLES 1.3 LOGICALLY EQUIVALENT PROPOSITIONS 1.4 MORE ABOUT CONDITIONAL PROPOSITIONS 1.5 PROPOSITIONAL FUNCTIONS AND QUANTIFIERS 1.6 TAUTOLOGIES, CONTRADICTIONS, PARADOXES 1.7 ABOUT LOGICAL ARGUMENTS 1.8 INTRODUCTION TO PROOFS EXERCISES 1 2. SOME THINGS ABOUT SOME NUMBERS AND PROVING TECHNIQUES 2.1 DIVISIBILITY IN Z 2.2 DIRECT PROOFS 2.3 PROOFS BY CONTRADICTION 2.4 PROOFS BY CONTRAPOSITIVE 2.5 MANY EXAMPLES 2.6 COUNTEREXAMPLES 2.7 PROOFS BY INDUCTION EXERCISES 2 3. SOME THINGS ABOUT SET THEORY AND PROVING TECHNIQUES 3.1 CARTESIAN PRODUCT 3.2 RELATIONS 3.3 FUNCTIONS 3.4 ONE TO ONE AND ONTO FUNCTIONS 3.5 FINITE AND INFINITE SETS 3.6 CARDINALITY EXERCISES 3 4. REVIEW PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS TO (MOST) PROBLEMS IN CHAPTERS 1, 2 AND 3

1. INTRODUCTION

This course is aimed at showing to the undergraduate student the symbols, syntaxes and semantics of mathematical language and the logic of (modern) mathematical argumentation a key point is to understand that this language and the modes of argumentation do not necessary reflect the everyday language and everyday modes of argumentation. Mathematical language is not another language (e.g. English) made more precise or unambiguous, it is a new, different language which borrows from another, pre-existing language (e.g. English) some terms and structures to make the writing statements more friendly and to allow the oral expression of symbols. For example, the statement

P N 0 P n (n P n 1 P) P N

is written using only mathematical symbols. It can be read in English as: If P is a subset of the natural numbers and zero belongs to P and for any natural number n the statement n belongs to P implies n plus one belongs to P then P is the set of natural numbers. It could also be read (in English) as: If P is included in N and zero is an element of P and for all natural numbers n the statement n is an element of P implies n plus one is also an element of P then P is equal to N. The statement could also be written as: If P N and 0 P and for any n N , n P implies n 1 P , then P = N ; combining mathematical symbols with English symbols. Furthermore, not every argumentation is mathematical. In other spheres of life, convincing someone of something does not necessary require a mathematical argumentation. For example, I can say to a friend: if you have back pain, buy a new mattress, because, when I had back pain I bought a new mattress and my pain went away. My friend is convinced by my argument and goes and buys a new mattress and his pain is gone! However, my argument is not a mathematical argument it assumes that because something happened in one particular case (my case) it will always happen (everybodys back pain will go away if they go and buy a new mattress). Each domain of action (commerce, medicine, family, etc.) might have its own modes of valid argumentation at least, modern mathematics has one and it is part of what will be explored in this course. Most of all, we will be concerned with the mathematical validity of statements and with demonstrating this validity, this is, whether a statement is mathematically true or false. The basis of mathematical argumentation in modern mathematics is second-order logic, which is an extension of first-order logic, which is an extension of propositional logic (also known as propositional calculus). Propositional logic is the part of logic that deals with combining statements using the logical operators and, or, not and implies. We will consider a very informal approach to the key aspects of propositional logic that are needed for this course: negation of statements, equivalence of statements, implications, truth tables. In first-order logic

we use not only the operators from the propositional calculus but also quantifiers (for all and exists). The main difference between first-order logic and second-order logic is that in firstorder logic we only quantify individuals, but in second-order logic, we can quantify sets of individuals. For example, in first order logic we can say for any real number x there exists a real number y such that x + y = 0, but we cannot say every nonempty subset A of the integers has a minimum element this is a statement in second-order logic. In first-order logic, variables can range over individuals; in second-order logic variables can also range over sets of individuals (in the first example, the quantifier for all (written for any) is applied to the variable x which ranges over real numbers, in the second example, the quantifier for all (written every) is applied to the variable A that ranges over sets of integer numbers). In symbols, the two previous statements can be written: ( x ( A N )( A )( n A)( m A)(n m) , respectively.

R)( y R)(x y 0) and

It is clear that in mathematics we need second-order logic, as we are all the time making statements not only about numbers but also about sets of numbers.

1.1 PROPOSITIONS AND LOGICAL OPERATORS In mathematics, a proposition or a statement is a sentence that is true or false, but not both true and false. Given a proposition P, it has associated a truth value that is either true (T) or false (F). Examples a. b. c. d. e. It is raining today is a proposition in the mathematical sense. 3 + 2 is not a proposition in the mathematical sense; it is just a phrase, or a sentence. 3 < 2 is a proposition in the mathematical sense. x + 1 = 3 is not a proposition in the mathematical sense (it is an open statement see section 1.6). ax2 + bx + c isnt a proposition.

Today, July 28 2010, the truth value of proposition a. is T. The truth value of proposition c. is F. In second-order logic we use logical operators to change or combine propositions to create new proposition. These operators are: negation (not, in symbols: ), conjunction (and, in symbols: ), disjunction (or, in symbols: ) and material conditional (implies, in symbols: ). If the letter A represents a proposition, the symbols which is the negation of statement (of A).

A , read not A, represents a new statement

The other three logical operators are connectors between two statements. When these operators are applied to two statements, a new statement is created. These are: conjunction statement, disjunction statement, and conditional statement. In mathematics, the logical operator or, that is the disjunction operator, is inclusive; this means that if A and B are statements, the statement A or B is true if A is true, B is true or both are true. This is different in English a language in which or is used mostly in its exclusive form: or is sometimes inclusive and sometimes exclusive, depending on the context. For example, in the sentence you can have coffee or tea, the disjunction is meant to be exclusive (you are not supposed to answer Ill have both). If A and B are statements, the conjunction is represented A B and read A and B; the disjunction is represented A B and read A or B; and implication is represented A B and read if A, then B or A implies B. In the structure A B , A is called the hypothesis (H) or antecedent of the proposition and B is called the thesis (T) or consequent of the proposition. The notation A and only if B.

B)

(B

A) . It is read A if

1.2 TRUTH TABLES Mathematicians are always concerned with the validity of statements; they are all the time asking someone else or even themselves the questions is A true or is A false. Validity (something being true or false), however, is very relative for humans; relative to their cultures, beliefs, etc. Hence, (contemporary) mathematicians have agreed on what they accept as true and what they accept as false. We will not go formally over all the inference rules, though we might refer to them when studying proving techniques. But just to have a glimpse of what this agreement is, we will consider the truth tables for the logical operators and, or, not and implies. The truth tables refer to the relation between the truth value of different statements and statements constructed from them by means of logical operators. Below are the truth tables for the statements A B and A B .

A B AND A B .

In propositional logic, the truth value of an implication is given by the truth table:

As you can see, the validity of the implication A B does not refer to the possibility of inferring the validity of B from the validity of A. There is no causality it is not that A causes B. For example, consider the statements A: The earth is the third planet from the sun and B: Argentina is a country in this planet. Because both A and B are true, according to propositional logic, the implication A B is also true. However, the validity of B cannot be inferred from the validity of A; in other words, if we tell an extraterrestrial being or perhaps not so extraterrestrial that A is true and ask whether B is true or not, he or she wont be able to answer. The implication statement A a. b. c. d. e. f.

Another important fact in propositional logic is that from a false statement anything can be implied; this idea is reflected in the 3rd and 4th rows of the truth table. In mathematics, the fact that from a false hypothesis any thesis can be implied (true or false) so that the implication is true is a useful tool. Examples a. If 2 times 0 equals 0, then 3 is a prime number, If 2 times 0 equals 1, then 3 is a prime number, and If 2 times 0 equals 1, then 6 is a prime number are all true propositions. In the first case, both H and T are true. In the other two cases the H is false... you can think about this as if the H is false, then the implication is not interesting anymore... The proposition If 2 times 0 equals 0, then 6 is a prime number is false. Why?

b.

1.3 LOGICALLY EQUIVALENT PROPOSITIONS Two statements are said to be logically equivalent (L.E.) if they have the same truth values for all assignments of truth values of its atomic propositions. If A and B are L.E., we write A B .

Examples a. b.

A ( A) ( P Q) ( P )

( Q)

Proof.

P T T F F

Q T F T F

P F F T T

Q F T F T

c.

( P Q)

( P)

( Q)

1.4 MORE ABOUT CONDITIONAL PROPOSITIONS The negation of the conditional statement A B , in symbols ( A B) , is equivalent to the statement A and not B (in symbols: A ( B) ). Then, it follows from example c. above that A B is equivalent to ( A) B . There are three important statements associated to a conditional statement; these are converse, inverse and contrapositive. Given the conditional statement A B , the converse is B A ; the inverse is ( A) ( B) ; and the contrapositive is ( B) ( A) . We will see later on that the contrapositive is a very important tool for proving. In particular, we note here that A B is equivalent to its contrapositive.

Proof. A T T F F B T F T F

A

T F T T

A F F T T

B F T F T

( B)

( A)

T F T T Q.E.D.

1.5 PROPOSITIONAL FUNCTIONS AND QUANTIFIERS As was mentioned before, a sentence such as x + 1 = 3 is not a proposition because its true value depends upon the value of the variable x; the sentence is an open statement or a propositional function. Formally, a variable x is a symbol which represents an unspecified object of a certain universal set X. A propositional function in the variable x is a sentence that becomes a proposition when values from the universe X are substituted for the variable. Example x + 1 = 3 is a propositional function; 2 + 1 = 3 is a proposition. If P(x) denotes the propositional function x + 1 = 3, P(2) denotes the proposition obtained by substituting 2 by x, i.e., the proposition 2 + 1 = 3.

The subset of the universe X that makes true a proposition P(x) is called the truth set of the propositional function P(x).

Examples a. b. c. The set T = { 4} is the truth set of the propositional function x + 1 = 3. If P(x) denotes the propositional function x2 < 0, then the truth set is the empty set. If P(x) denotes the propositional function x is divisible by 3 then the truth set depends on what we define to be the universal set. If the universal set is N, then T ={numbers whose digits add to a multiple of 3}, if the universal set is R, then T = R.

It is now time to define the quantifiers that were briefly mentioned at the beginning of this introduction. The universal quantifier is denoted by the symbol and read in English as for all, for every, for each.

If P(x) is a propositional function over the universal set X, by universally quantifying P(x), we obtain the proposition ( x X )(P( x)) that is true when the truth set of P(x) is X and is false otherwise. (The symbols are to be read for all x in X, we have P(x). For example, for all x in N, x + 1 > 0, this is for every natural number x, x + 1 is strictly positive. The existential quantifier is denoted by the symbol is, there exists. and read in English as for some, there

If P(x) is a propositional function over the universal set X, by existentially quantifying P(x), we obtain the proposition ( x X )(P( x)) that is true when the truth set of P(x) is non-empty and is false otherwise. The negation of the quantified proposition ( x X )(P( x)) is the quantified proposition ( x X )( P( x)) and the negation of the quantified proposition ( x X )(P( x)) is the quantified proposition ( x X )( P( x)) . It follows then that the following quantified propositions are equivalent:

( x X )(P( x)) ( x ( x X )(P( x)) ( x X )( P( x)) X )( P( x))

Examples a. A: Every prime number greater than two is odd. Not A: There is a prime number greater than two that is even. or Not A: There is an even prime number greater than two. A: There exists a triangle with 180 degrees interior angle. Not A: Every triangle has interior angles that measure strictly less than 180 degrees. or Not A: The interior angle of any triangle measures < 180 degrees.

b.

1.6 TAUTOLOGIES, CONTRADICTIONS, PARADOXES A tautology is a proposition that is true for every truth assignment of its atomic propositions. A contradiction is a proposition that is false for every truth assignment of its atomic propositions. A contingency is a proposition that is neither a tautology nor a contradiction. A paradox is a sentence (not a proposition!) that is neither true nor false (not that we cant figure out whether is true or false that would be a conjecture but that its neither true nor false).

Examples a. b. c. d. e. The open statement P(n) given by an integer n is odd or it is even leads to a tautology. The open statement P(n) given by an integer n is odd and is even leads to a contradiction. The open statement x > 0 and x < 0 is a contradiction for any value of the variable x. This sentence is false and I am a liar are examples of paradoxes. The Barbers paradox. Suppose theres a barber who shaves men if and only if they dont shave themselves. Then, the sentence the barber shaves himself is a paradox. (This is a version of the very well known Russells paradox or antinomy; the statement of this paradox by Bertrand Russell leads to the formulation of modern axiomatic set theory by the mathematicians Ernst Zermelo, Abraham Fraenkel and Thoralf Skolem known today at ZFC theory.) Every even natural number greater than 2 is the sum of two primes is a conjecture known as the Goldbachs conjecture and it has not been proved to be true (or false) up to this day.

f.

1.7 ABOUT LOGICAL ARGUMENTS In mathematics, a logical argument is a claim that from certain hypothesis assumed to be true one can infer a certain thesis that is also true. Logic is concerned with the methods and principles that can be used to distinguish valid arguments from invalid arguments. The symbol is to be read therefore. If H1, H2, , Hn are hypothesis and T is a thesis, a logical argument can be written as: H1, H2, , Hn or H1 H2 . . . Hn ----T Recall that a hypothesis is also called premise and a thesis is also called conclusion those names become quite clear in the context of studying arguments. T

A logical argument H1, H2, , Hn T is valid if and only if the proposition H 1 H 2 ... H n T is a tautology. In any other case, the argument is said to be invalid. Examples a. Let P be the statement today in Montreal is very cold and Q be the statement today in Montreal is very warm. The argument P P Q is a valid argument. Proof. We need to show that the implication P P Q is a tautology. Lets consider the truth table: P T T F F Q T F T F

P Q T T T F

( P Q) T T T T

b.

Since the proposition P P Q is true for any truth value of its components, it is a tautology. QED The following arguments are valid (see exercise 11): i. P Q P ii. P, P Q Q iii. P Q, Q R P R iv. P Q, P Q

There are many invalid arguments (also called fallacies) and one must be aware of them, so to avoid them. Here we provide two classical examples of invalid arguments:

Examples of fallacies The fallacy of the converse: P Q, Q P The fallacy of the inverse: P Q, P Q Lets prove that the fallacy of the converse is not a valid argument (i.e., its in fact a fallacy). The proof that the fallacy of the inverse is also invalid is left as an exercise. Proof. We need to show that the proposition ( P tautology. We consider the corresponding truth table:

Q) Q P is not a

P T T F F

Q T F T F

P

T F T T

(P

Q) Q T F T F

(P

Q) Q T T F T

We can see theres one instance in which the proposition ( P is not true, thus it is not a tautology. QED

Q) Q

Theres a lot more to say about arguments and the rules to construct valid arguments (inference rules). For this course, we will stop here the curious reader can look at textbooks suggested in the outline of the course.

1.8 INTRODUCTION TO PROOFS In this course we will be learning techniques to prove the truth value of conditional statements and quantified statements. Remember that a conditional statement of the form A B is true if A and B are true or if A is false; this second case is of no interest from a mathematics point of view thus, we will be concerned with the case in which, assuming that A is true, we want to prove that B is also true, so that the conditional statement itself is true. With respect to quantified statements, notice that to prove that ( x X )(P( x)) is true, it suffices to find one element x in X for which P(x) is true. Proving that ( x X )(P( x)) is true could be in general more challenging as it has to be shown that P is true for any assignment of the variable x. In mathematics, given a proposition there are two possible actions to follow: give a proof (of it being true or false) or give a counterexample. A counterexample is an example of the wrongness of the given statement. For example, consider the statement every odd number is a multiple of 3. The number 5 is a counterexample for the statement the existence of number 5, which is odd and not a multiple of 3, shows that the statement is false. Proofs can be divided into several types, the ones we are going to cover in this course are: a. b. c. d. e. f. Direct proof. Indirect proof (by contrapositive). Forward-backward proof. Proof by cases. Proof by contradiction. Mathematical induction.

10

In the examples below, a. and b. are examples of direct proofs, and c. is an example of a counterexample.

Examples a. If the discriminant of the expression ax2 + bx +c is strictly greater than zero, then the equation ax2 + bx +c = 0 has exactly two solutions. Proof. We know that if the hypothesis is false, the implication is true. Hence, to prove that the implication is true, we only need to focus in the case where the hypothesis is true, then, the truth value of the implication will depend on whether the thesis is true or false. The ) / 2 and ( b )/2. solutions of the given equation are ( b Since, the hypothesis > 0 is true, these are two different numbers. Q.E.D. Consider the quantified statement there exists an even prime number. In symbols ( x prime)(x is even) . Proof. To prove that the proposition is true, it suffices to exhibit one element of the universe (the universal set here is that of the prime numbers) that makes the propositional function n is an even prime number true. Well, 2 is prime and is even. Q.E.D. Consider the quantified statement every integer multiple of 3 is a multiple of 6. In symbols ( x Z )(if x 3k for some k Z x 6m for some m Z ) . Proof. To prove that the statement is false it suffices to exhibit a counterexample, this is, to show a multiple of 3 which is not a multiple of 6. Our counterexample could be the integer 9. Q.E.D.

b.

c.

Note that in c. we have a proposition of the type for all integer x, P(x) implies Q(x). By exhibiting our counterexample x = 9, we are showing that the implication P(9) implies Q(9) is false, since P(9) is true, but Q(9) is false (recall the truth table of the conditional proposition). Later on we will go back to the use of counterexamples.

EXERCISES 1 1. Is the following sentence a proposition? This statement is false. 2. Write the truth tables of the following statements. a. A b. A B c. ( A B) C d. ( A ( B C )

11

e.

(A

B)

(C

D)

3. Show that a. A A A b. A A A c. A B B A d. A B ( B)

( A)

as the exclusive or. Write the truth table for this operator.

5. Prove the De Morgan Laws: a. ( P Q ) ( P ) ( Q) b. ( P Q) ( P) ( Q) 6. Prove the following logically equivalencies (see section 1.5): a. A B ( A) B b. ( A B) A ( B) 7. Write the truth table of the following statements. Identify tautologies and contradictions. a. P ( P) b. P ( P Q) c. P ( P Q) d. ( P Q) (Q P) e. P (( P) (Q ( Q))) f. {[(P Q) R] ( P R)} ( P Q) 8. Negate the following statements. a. Every isosceles triangle has two equal sides. b. For every real number x there exists a real number y such that x + y = 0. In mathematical symbols: ( x R)( y R) : x y 0 . c. There exists an integer n such that 2n equals an odd number. In mathematical symbols: ( n Z )( k N ) : 2n 2k 1 .\ 9. Find the truth set of the following propositional functions. a. P(x) is the propositional function (x2 2)(2x + 1) = 0 and the universe is (i) R; (ii) Q. b. P(x) is the propositional function x R such that 3x > 2. c. P(f(x)) is the propositional function f (x) = 0. The variable here is f(x) and the universal set is X = {f: RR}. (Of course, f (x) denotes the first derivative of the function f.) 10. Negate the following quantified statements. (Make appropriate use of parenthesis!) a. For all positive integer k, 2k + 1 is an odd integer. b. For all continuous functions f:RR, the derivative function is also continuous.

12

c. d.

There exists a square matrix A which is not invertible. Suppose, f(x) is a given function and a and L are given constants. Negate the statement For all >0 there exists a >0 such that if |x a|< then |f(x) L|< . (This is the definition of lim f ( x) L .)

x a

11. Give a proof for examples b. i to iv in page 9. 12. Prove that the fallacy of the inverse is in fact a fallacy (see example in page 9). 13. Consider the following arguments. Are they valid? Provide a proof of your claim. a. If the butler is nervous, he did it. The butler is calm. Therefore, the butler didnt do it. b. The number is irrational if it is not the ratio of 2 integers. Therefore, since cannot be written in the form a/b where a and b are integers, it is irrational 14. Prove the following statements. a. Statement a. in Ex. 9. b. For every positive integer k, if p is a factor of k, then p2 is a factor of k2. c. If the discriminant of ax2 + bx + c equals 0, then the equation ax2 + bx + c = 0 has exactly one solution. 15. Prove the following logical equivalences (use truth tables). a. [( x X ) P( x)] ( x X )( P( x)) b. [( x X ) P( x)] ( x X )( P( x))

13