Propositional Function

and Quantification
 Propositional Function

A propositional function or predicate is a

complete declarative sentence P(x) that makes a
statement about the variable x. The variable x is called
the argument of P(x). If x is assigned a particular value,
then P(x) becomes a proposition with a definite truth
value.
Example
Let P(x) denote the statement “x > 3”.
What are the truth values of P(4) and
P(2)?

Solution:
P(4) : “4 > 3.” This proposition has the
truth value T.
P(2): “2 > 3.” This has truth value of F.
 Universal Quantification
When all variables in a propositional function are assigned
values, the resulting statement has a truth value. There is another
method to change propositional functions into propositions called
quantification which may be universal or existential.
The universal quantification of P(x) is the proposition “P(x) is
true for ALL values of x in the domain of discourse.”
The notation ∀ 𝑥𝑃(𝑥), read as “For all x, P(x)” or “For every x,
P(x),” denotes the universal quantification of P(x). The domain of
discourse specifies the possible values of the variable x.
Examples
Express the statement “Every student in this class has
studied calculus” as a universal quantification.

Solution:
Let P(x) denote the statement “x has studied
calculus.”

The given statement can now be expressed

as ∀ 𝑥𝑃(𝑥), where the domain of discourse consists
of the students in class.
Examples
Let P(x) be “x + 1 > x.” What is the truth value
of ∀ 𝑥𝑃(𝑥), where the domain of discourse is
the set ℝ?

Solution:
∀ 𝑥𝑃 𝑥 : “For all x, x + 1 > x.” Since a
real number x will always be smaller than x +
1, ∀ 𝑥𝑃 𝑥 has the truth value of T.
Examples
Let Q(x) be “x < 2.” What is the truth value of
∀ 𝑥𝑄 𝑥 , where the domain of discourse is the
set ℚ?

Solution:
∀ 𝑥𝑄 𝑥 : “For all x, x < 2.” Since x < 2 is
not true when x = 3, ∀ 𝑥𝑄 𝑥 has the truth value
of F.
 Existential Quantification
The existential quantification of P(x) is the proposition
“There exist an element x in the domain of discourse such that
P(x) is true.” The notion ∃ 𝑥𝑃(𝑥) is read as “There is an x such
that P(x)” or “For some x, P(x).” These denote the existential
quantification of P(x).
Examples
Let P(x) be “x + 1 > x.” What is the truth value of
∃ 𝑥𝑃(𝑥), where the domain of discourse is the set
ℝ?

Solution:
∃ 𝑥𝑃 𝑥 : “There is an x such that x + 1 > x.”
Since x + 1 > x when x = 1, ∃ 𝑥𝑃 𝑥 has the truth
value of T.
Examples
Let Q(x) be “x < 2.” What is the truth value of
∃ 𝑥𝑄 𝑥 , where the domain of discourse is the
set ℚ?

Solution:
∃ 𝑥𝑄 𝑥 : “There is an x such that x < 2.”
Since x < 2 when x = 0, ∃ 𝑥𝑄 𝑥 has the truth
value of T.
 Seatwork
I. Use quantifiers to express the following statements.
1. Every student needs a course in mathematics.
2. There is a student in this class who owns a dual SIM
smartphone.
3. Every student in this class has been in every building on
campus.
4. There is a student in this class who has been in every floor of
at least one building on campus.
 Seatwork
II. Let Q(x, y) denote the statement “x is the capital of y.” What
are the truth values of Q(Paris, France), Q(Sydney, Australia), and
Q(Japan, Tokyo)?
III. Let P(x, y) denote “x + y = 0.” What are the truth values of
∃𝑦 ∀𝑥𝑃 𝑥, 𝑦 and ∀𝑥 ∃𝑦 𝑃 𝑥, 𝑦 ?
Mathematical Reasoning
 Inductive versus Deductive Reasoning
Inductive reasoning is the process of making general
conclusions based on specific examples.
Examples:
1. Every object that I release from my hand falls to the
ground. Therefore, the next object I release from my hand
will fall to the ground.
2. Every crow I have seen is black. Therefore, all crows are
black.
 Inductive versus Deductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning is the process of making specific
conclusions based on general principles.
Examples:
1. All men are mortal. I am a man. Therefore, I am
mortal.
2. If 6x = 12, then x = 2.
 Inductive versus Deductive Reasoning
Science is the application of inductive reasoning to
build knowledge based on observable evidence. That is why
every statement in science is considered a theory. The only
way to prove it is to collect more evidence. However, there
is always the probability that future evidence could prove
the statement false.
Mathematics is deductive reasoning applied to
relations among patterns, shapes, forms, structures, and
even changes. Deductive reasoning is always valid.
 Rules of Inference
A theorem is a statement that can be shown to
be true. It is formulated by using a sequence of
statements that form an argument, called a proof. The
statements used in a proof may include axioms, which
are the underlying assumptions about mathematical
structures, the hypothesis of the theorem to be proved,
and previously proved theorems. The rules of inference
tie together the steps of a proof.
 Rules of Inference
Rule of Inference Name Rule of Inference Name
~q
p Modus tollens
___________ Addition 𝑝→𝑞
∴𝑝∨𝑞
_________ (the mode of denying)
∴ ~𝑝
𝑝→𝑞
𝑝∧𝑞
_________ Simplification q→𝑟 Hypothetical syllogism
_________
∴𝑝
∴𝑝→𝑟
p 𝑝∨𝑞
q Conjunction ~p Disjunctive syllogism
_________ _________
∴𝑝∧𝑞 ∴𝑞
p
𝑝→𝑞 Modus ponens
_________ (the mode of affirming)
∴𝑞
Examples
What rule of inference is used in each of the following
arguments?
1. Anna is a human resource management major.
Therefore, Anna is either human resource
management major or a computer application major.
2. Ben is a designer and a game developer. Therefore,
Ben is a game designer.
3. If it rains today, the college will be closed. The college
is not closed today. Therefore, it did not rain today.
Examples
What rule of inference is used in each of the following
arguments?
4. If it is rainy, then the oval will be closed. It is rainy.
Therefore, the oval is closed.
5. If I go swimming, then I will stay in the sun too long. If
I stay in the sun too long, then I will get burned.
Therefore, if I go swimming, then I will get burned.
 Fallacies
Fallacies are incorrect reasoning which appear to follow the
rules of inference but are based on contingencies rather than
tautologies.

Three types of fallacies:

1. The fallacy of affirming the conclusion is based on the compound
proposition [(𝑝 → 𝑞) ∧ 𝑞] → 𝑝.
2. The fallacy of denying the hypothesis is based on the compound
proposition 𝑝 → 𝑞 ∧ ~𝑝 → ~𝑞.
3. Begging the question or circular reasoning occurs when one or more
steps of a proof are based on the truth of the statement being proved.
Examples
Determine if the following arguments are valid. If not,
what fallacy was committed?
1. If you do every problem in a math book, then you will
learn mathematics. You learned mathematics.
Therefore, you did every problem in the book.
2. If 𝑛2 is even, then n is even.
3. If you do every problem in a math book, then you will
learn mathematics. You did not do every problem in
the book. Therefore, you did not learn mathematics.
 Some Methods of Proof
Method of Proof Description

A proof that the implication 𝑝 → 𝑞 is true by showing that q must be

Direct Proof
true if p is true.
A proof that the implication 𝑝 → 𝑞 is true by showing that p must be
Indirect Proof
false when q is false.
A proof that the proposition p is true based on the truth of the
Proof of Contradiction
implication ~𝑝 → 𝑞 where q is a contradiction.
Let P(n) be a proposition for each positive integer n. If the following
two conditions are satisfied, then P(n) is true for all positive integers n:
Proof by Mathematical
• The proposition P(1) is true.
Induction
• The implication P(n) → P(n+1) is shown to be true for every positive
integer n.
Examples
Give a direct proof of the statement, “If n is odd, then 𝑛2 is
odd.”

Suppose n is odd. Then, n = 2k + 1 for some integer k. It

follows that 𝑛2 = (2𝑘 + 1)2 = 4𝑘 2 + 4𝑘 + 1
= 2(2𝑘 2 + 2𝑘) + 1. Therefore, 𝑛2 is odd.
Examples
Give an indirect proof of the theorem, “If 3n +2 is odd,
then n is odd.”

Assume that n is even (negation of odd). Then n = 2k for

some integer k. It follows that 3n + 2 = 3(2k) + 2= 6k + 2
= 2(3k + 1). Hence, 3n + 2 is even. Since the negation of
the conclusion of the implication implies that the
hypothesis is false, the original implication is true.
Examples
Prove that 2 is irrational by giving a proof of
contradiction.

Suppose that 2 is rational. Thus, there exist integers a

𝑎
and b with 2 = , where 𝑎 and 𝑏 have no common
𝑏
𝑎
factors (or in lowest terms). Since 2 = , it follows that
𝑏
𝑎2
2= or 2𝑏 2 = 𝑎2 .
𝑏2
Examples
𝑎2
2= or 2𝑏 2 = 𝑎2
𝑏2

This means that 𝑎2 is even, implying that 𝑎 is even.

Furthermore, since 𝑎 is even, 𝑎 = 2𝑐 for some integer c.
Thus, 2𝑏 2 = 4𝑐 2 , so that 𝑏2 = 2𝑐 2 .

This means that 𝑏 2 is even. Hence, b must be even also.

𝑎
Since 𝑎 and 𝑏 are both even, can be simplified further by
𝑏
dividing 𝑎 and 𝑏 by 2. This contradicts the assumption that
𝑎 and 𝑏 have no common factor. Hence, 2 is irrational.
Examples
𝑛(𝑛+1)
Prove: 1 + 2 + 3+ … + n = for every positive integer n.
2

I. Verification
If n = 1, verify if P(1) is true.
1(1+1) 1(2)
1= = =1 ∴ 𝑃 1 𝑖𝑠 𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑒.
2 2
If n = 2, verify if P(2) is true.
2(2 + 1)
1+2=
2
2(3)
3=
2
3=3 ∴ 𝑃 2 𝑖𝑠 𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑒.
Examples
If n = 3, verify if P(3) is true.
3(3 + 1)
1+2+3=
2
3(4)
6=
2
6=6 ∴ 𝑃 3 𝑖𝑠 𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑒.
II. Hypothesis of Induction
Assume that the statement is true for n = k, that is, P(k) is
true.
𝑘(𝑘+1)
1 + 2 + 3+ … + k = (eq. 1)
2
Examples
Prove that the statement is true for n = k + 1, that is, P(k + 1) is
true.
𝑘+1 [ 𝑘+1 +1]
1 + 2 + 3+ … + k + (k + 1) = 2
(eq. 2)
Since eq. 1 is 1 term away from eq. 2
𝑘(𝑘+1)
1 + 2 + 3+ … + k + (k + 1) = + (k + 1) (eq. 3)
2
Substituting the LHS of eq. 3 with that of eq. 2
𝑘+1 [ 𝑘+1 +1] 𝑘(𝑘+1)
= + (k + 1)
2 2
Examples
𝑘+1 [ 𝑘+1 +1] 𝑘(𝑘+1)
= 2 + (k + 1)
2
𝑘+1 𝑘+2 𝑘(𝑘+1) 2(𝑘+1)
= +
2 2 2
𝑘 2 +𝑘 2𝑘+2
= +
2 2
𝑘 2 +𝑘+2𝑘+2
= 2
𝑘 2 +3𝑘+2
= 2
𝑘+1 𝑘+2 𝑘+1 𝑘+2
=
2 2
∴ 𝑃 𝑘 + 1 𝑖𝑠 𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑒.
Examples
III. Conclusion
Since the statement is true for n = k + 1, then it must
be true for all higher natural number.
 Seatwork
Prove each item as indicated.
Direct Proof
1. If n is an even integer, then 𝑛2 is an even integer.
2. For all integers m and n, if m is odd and n is even, then m + n is odd.
Indirect Proof
1. For all integers m and n, if the product of m and n is even, then m is even or n is even.
2. If n is an integer and 𝑛2 + 1 is odd, then n is even.
Proof of Contradiction
1. Let x and y be real numbers. Show that if 5x + 25y =1723, then x and y is not an integer.
2. Prove that for all real numbers x and y, if 35x + 14y = 253, then x is not an integer or y is not an integer.
Proof of Mathematical Induction
7(7𝑛 −1)
1. 7 + 72 + 73 + ⋯ + 7𝑛 = for every positive integer n.
6
2. 5 l (𝑛5 − 𝑛) 5 divides 𝑛5 − 𝑛 or (𝑛5 − 𝑛) is divisible by 5