Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
without ambiguity. The truth or falsity of the statement is known as the truth value.
3. Every even number greater than 2 is the sum of two primes is a statement,
Negation : Let p stand for a given statement. Then p ( read not p ) represents
the logical opposite of p. When p is true, then p is false and viceversa. This can
be summarized in a truth table, which gives the mapping from the truth
value of the individual statements to the truth value of the resulting compound
statement. Some authors also use for the negation connective. In this case
p p
T F .
F T
where T stands for true and F for false. Note that the truth table of a
connective is an alternative way of defining a connective, since these are defined in
terms of the truth value of the resulting compound statement, given the truth value
of its components.
p q pq
T T T
T F F .
F T F
F F F
Logical Connectives 9
For example, given p : 2 > 0 and q : 0 > 2 then the compound statement
p q : 2 > 0 and 0 > 2 is false.
p q pq
T T T
T F T .
F T T
F F F
Note that the inclusive disjunction doesnt complete the list of disjunctions
used in everyday life. In fact, we also have the exclusive disjunction, which is true
when either p or q is true, but not when both are true. In logic the only use for
the connective or is for the inclusive meaning. For example, given p : 2 > 0 and
If p, then q
p is called the antecedent and the then-statement q is called the consequent. The
convention adopted for the truth value of the implication is that it will be called
false only when the antecedent is true and the consequent is false. If we denote the
p q pq
T T T
T F F .
F T T
F F T
The last row of the table may seem counterintuitive. However, the usage of if
T
of daily language. The reason for giving truth value to the last case may be not
Nevertheless, we can easily prove the implication is indeed true: 3 + 1 3 = 7 3 = 4
so 1 = 4. But then 6 1 = 6 4 = 2.
q.
In English there are several ways to express the same mathematical condition
p These are
p q p q q p p q
T T T T T
T F F T F
F T T F F
F F T T T
Thus we see that p q is true precisely when p and q have the same truth
values. Since p q is equivalent to (p q) (q p) we can use the terminology
seen above for the implication connective and say
q if p and q only if p
p is a sufficient condition for q and p is a necessary condition for q
Two compound statements p and q are said to be logically equivalent if one
is true if and only if the other is true. In other words, two compound propositions
are logically equivalent whenever they display the same truth table. In this case we
write p q.
p q (p q) p q [(p) (q)]
T T F F F F
T F T F T T
F T T T F T
F F T T T T
Exercise 7 (Implication) Show that the implication symbol is not a primitive
p q
[(p) q] .
connector. In other words, show that the implication is logically equivalent
When two compound statements p and q are logically equivalent, their equiv-
alence is a new statement with a truth value true in all cases. Such a statement is
known as a tautology, being its definition
Definition 8 A compound proposition is said to be a tautology if it is always true
regardless of the truth value of the simple propositions from which it is constructed.
It is a contradiction if it is always false. Hence a contradiction and a tautology are
a negation of each other.
p q p q p q q
( ) p
( ) (p q ) q
[( ) p
( )]
T T T F F T T
T F F F T F T
F T T T F T T
F F T T T T T
12 Logic and Proof
Exercise 12 (De Morgans Law) Prove that (pq) is logically equivalent to [(p) (q)]
Exercise 13 Establish the logical equivalence of these compound statements
1. (p q ) [p q]
2. (p q ) (q p)
Remark 14 p q
p. Claiming the opposite is a very common mistake you should not
As you have already proven is not logically equivalent to its
converse q
make in the future.
Exercise 15 Write the negation of each statement
a) If K is closed and bounded, then K is compact.
b) If K is compact, then K is closed and bounded.
c) A continuous function is differentiable.
x S, p(x)]
[ means that p(x) is true provided it is true for each x in S . As
an example, if S = {4, 5}, then [ x S, p(x) : x> 3] [(4 > 3) (5 > 3)].
Sometimes the set S is implicit in the context, and can be omitted. The notation
therefore becomes more compact, leading to x, p(x).
Exercise 18 Let S be a finite set (i.e. {1, 2}). Use de De Morgans law to show that
[x S p(x)] [x S, p(x)], and [x S , p(x)] [x S, p(x)] are
tautologies.
Sometimes ! x to denote the case when a unique value
we use the symbol
exists for the variable x that makes p(x) true. The universal and the existential
quantifiers are thus seen as extensions of the logical connectives and , to deal with
infinitely many assertions, or assertions about infinitely many things, x. Moreover,
one can combine the existential quantifier with negation: means there exists no
As we saw in the last exercise, we can use both and in one statement. It
is important to clarify the following point about the order in which quantifiers are
used. While [x, y, p(x, y)] [y, x, p(x, y)] [x, y, p(x, y)], the propositions
[ y x p(x, y)] and [x, y p(x, y)] are not logically equivalent. In this case, in
fact, the order in which quantifiers appear affects the meaning and the truth value
of the statement. The first statement says that for at least one y, p(x, y) is true for
all x. In other words, the choice of y is independent of x. On the other hand, the
second statement establishes that for all x there exist at least one y such that p(x, y)
is true. This means that the choice of y is allowed to depend on x.
stands for such that. Another ways of saying such that are given by the symbol : or
by writing s.t..
14 Logic and Proof
Exercise 22 The following statements give properties of functions that we shall en-
counter later in the course. You have to do two things. a) rewrite the defining
conditions in logical symbolism and b) write the negation of part a) using the same
symbolism.
3. A function f is periodic iff there exists a k > 0 such that for every x, f (x + k ) =
f (x).
f (x) f (y) .
5. A function f is strictly decreasing iff for every x and every y, if x y, then
f (x) > f (y ) .
10. The real number L is the limit of the function f : D R at the point c iff
for each > 0 there is a >0 such that |f (x) L| < whenever x D and
0 < |x c| < .
Techniques of Proof 15
Direct To show that p = q is true, we first assume that p is true and conclude that
q is true.
Example 23 If x > 1, then x2 > x. Here p:x>1 and q : x2 > x.The direct
proof goes as follows:
from the axiom If a>b and c > 0, then a c > b c we have x> 1
x x > 1 x;
But by definition x x = x2 and 1 x = x;
substituting in the above expression leads to x x > 1 x x2 > x
which is the conclusion we wanted x > 1 x2 > x.
(p q) (p q) [ (p1 p2 ) q ]
[(p1 p2 ) q ] [(p1 q) (p2 q)]
[(p1 q) (p2 q )]
meaning that you only need to show that p1 q and p2 q. Note that this
method works also if you decompose p into a number of propositions bigger
than 2 as far as these propositions are mutually exclusive (which means that
every pair of them is a contradiction).
Example 26 Take the contrapositive of the example given for the direct proof
method. The contrapositive is x2 x x 1.
Proof. By definition x2 0. Then p : 0 x2 x and q : x 1. Decompose
p into p1 : x > 0 and p2 : x = 0. Then p1 p2 is always false and p
(p1 p2 ) (p1 p2 ). To show that p2 q is trivial since 0 1. To prove
p1 q, we only need to use the implication c > 0, x y xc yc . Given
that x > 0 by assumption, x2 x xx xx x 1
2
Construction This approach is used when the statement includes an existential quantifier. i.e.,
the conclusion is of the form: x, p(x). To prove this, simply find (construct)
a value of x such that p(x) is true when H is true. For example, if A =
{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} and the proposition is: x A x > 2, observe that for x = 3 we
have x > 2 and x A.
Exercise 28 Show that f (x) = x is a continuous function at every x0 R . You
have to prove that > 0 , (x0, ) > 0 |x x0| < (x0 , ) |f (x) f (x0)| <
.
Techniques of Proof 17
Contradiction Suppose we want to prove p q. This method of proof also known as re-
ductio ad absurdum consists of assuming that [p (q)] is true and deriving
a contradiction c. To show that both statements are logically equivalent, we
compare their truth tables
p q p q q (p q ) c (p q) c
T T T F F F T
T F F T T F F .
F T T F F F T
F F T T F F T
An equivalent way of making a proof by contradiction is given by the follow-
ing tautology: (p = q) [(p (q)) = (p)]. This is a particular case of the
general definition, since [(p (q)) = (p)] is equivalent to [(p (q)) = ((p) p)]
(since p was already an assumption), and given that ((p) p) c then
[(p (q)) = c] .The proof of their equivalence is left as an exercise.
Exercise 29 Show that (p = q p
) [(
(q )) = (p)] .
[( ( )) = ( )] ( ( ))
Basis of Induction Prove that for the first element in the set of interest in this case m ,
p(m) is true,
Inductive step Show p(k ) p(k + 1), for k m. In other words, assume p(k ) is true and
prove that p(k + 1) is also true.
Exercise 33 The following tautologies are widely used in the methods of proof. Some
of them have already been seen before. a) Verify that they are indeed tautologies, b)
Interpret them and associate them with the different methods of proof
1. (p q) [(p q) (q p)]
2. (p q) [(p q) (p q)]
3. (p q) (q p)
4. p p
5. (p p) c
6. (p c) p
7. (p q) [(p q) c]
8. [ p (p q)] q
9. [q (p q)] p
10. [p (p q)] q
11. (p q) p
12. [(p q) (q r)] (p r)
13. [(p1 p2) (p2 p3) ... (pn1 pn )] (p1 pn)
14. [(p q) r] [p (q r)]
15. [(p q) (r s) (p r)] (q s)
16. [p (q r)] [(p q) r]
17. [(p q) r] [(p r) (q r)]
1.5 References
S.R Lay , Analysis with an Introduction to Proof . Chapter 1. Third Edition. Pren-
tice Hall.
A. Matozzi, Lecture Notes Econ 897 University of Pennsylvania Summer
2001.
H.L. Royden, Real Analysis . Third Edition. Prentice Hall.