1 / 41

CS322

Week 4 - Friday. CS322. Last time. What did we talk about last time? We had a snow day But you should have read about: Proof by cases Floor and ceiling Indirect proofs. The Law of Small Numbers.

teige
Download Presentation

CS322

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Week 4 - Friday CS322

  2. Last time • What did we talk about last time? • We had a snow day • But you should have read about: • Proof by cases • Floor and ceiling • Indirect proofs

  3. The Law of Small Numbers • I have claimed that many things can be demonstrated for a small set of numbers that are not actually true for all numbers • Example: • GCD(x,y) gives the greatest common divisor of x and y • GCD(n17 + 9, (n+1)17 + 9) = 1 for all n < 8424432925592889329288197322308900672459420460792433, but not for that number

  4. Questions?

  5. Logical warmup • Two friends who live 36 miles apart decide to meet and start riding their bikes towards each other. • They plan to meet halfway. • Each is riding at 6mph. • One of them has a pet carrier pigeon who starts flying the instant the friends start traveling. • The pigeon flies back and forth at 18mph between the friends until the friends meet. • How many miles does the pigeon travel?

  6. Student Lecture Proof by Contradiction

  7. Indirect Proof

  8. Proof by contradiction • The most common form of indirect proof is a proof by contradiction • In such a proof, you begin by assuming the negation of the conclusion • Then, you show that doing so leads to a logical impossibility • Thus, the assumption must be false and the conclusion true

  9. Example • Theorem: x, y  Z+, x2 – y2  1 • Proof by contradiction: Assume there is such a pair of integers

  10. Two Classic Results

  11. Square root of 2 is irrational Theorem: is irrational Proof by contradiction: • Suppose is rational • = m/n, where m,nZ, n  0 and m and n have no common factors • 2 = m2/n2 • 2n2 = m2 • 2k = m2, kZ • m = 2a, aZ • 2n2 = (2a)2 = 4a2 • n2 = 2a2 • n = 2b, bZ • 2|m and 2|n • is irrational QED • Negation of conclusion • Definition of rational • Squaring both sides • Transitivity • Square of integer is integer • Even x2 implies even x (Proof on p. 202) • Substitution • Transitivity • Even x2 implies even x • Conjunction of 6 and 9, contradiction • By contradiction in 10, supposition is false

  12. Proposition 4.7.3 • Claim: • Proof by contradiction: Suppose such that 1 1 Contradiction Negation of conclusion Definition of divides Definition of divides Subtraction Substitution Distributive law Definition of divides Since 1 and -1 are the only integers that divide 1 Definition of prime Statement 8 and statement 9 are negations of each other By contradiction at statement 10 QED

  13. Infinitude of primes Theorem: There are an infinite number of primes Proof by contradiction: • Suppose there is a finite list of all primes: p1, p2, p3, …, pn • Let N = p1p2p3…pn + 1, N Z • pk | N where pkis a prime • pk | p1p2p3…pn + 1 • p1p2p3…pn = pk(p1p2p3…pk-1pk+1…pn) • p1p2p3…pn = pkP, P Z • pk | p1p2p3…pn • pk does not divide p1p2p3…pn + 1 • pk does and does not divide p1p2p3…pn + 1 • There are an infinite number of primes QED • Negation of conclusion • Product and sum of integers is an integer • Theorem 4.3.4, p. 174 • Substitution • Commutativity • Product of integers is integer • Definition of divides • Proposition from last slide • Conjunction of 4 and 8, contradiction • By contradiction in 9, supposition is false

  14. A few notes about indirect proof • Don't combine direct proofs and indirect proofs • You're either looking for a contradiction or not • Proving the contrapositive directly is equivalent to a proof by contradiction

  15. Propositional Logic Review

  16. Propositional logic • Statements • AND, OR, NOT, IMPLIES • Truth tables • Logical equivalence • De Morgan's laws • Tautologies and contradictions

  17. Laws of Boolean algebra

  18. Implications • Can be used to write an if-then statement • Contrapositive is logically equivalent • Inverse and converse are not (though they are logically equivalent to each other) • Biconditional: • p q  q  p

  19. Arguments • A series of premises and a conclusion • Using the premises and rules of inference, an argument is valid if and only if you can show the conclusion • Rules of inference: • Modus Ponens • Modus Tollens • Generalization • Specialization • Conjunction • Elimination • Transitivity • Division into cases • Contradiction rule

  20. Digital logic • The following gates have the same function as the logical operators with the same names: • NOT gate: • AND gate: • OR gate:

  21. Predicate Logic Review

  22. Predicates • A predicate is a sentence with a fixed number of variables that becomes a statement when specific values are substituted for to the variables • The domain gives all the possible values that can be substituted • The truth set of a predicate P(x) are those elements of the domain that make P(x) true when they are substituted

  23. Sets • We will frequently be referring to various sets of numbers in this class • Some typical notation used for these sets: • Some authors use Z+ to refer to non-negative integers and only N for the natural numbers

  24. Quantifiers • The universal quantifier  means “for all” • The statement “All DJ’s are mad ill” can be written more formally as: • x  D, M(x) • Where D is the set of DJ’s and M(x) denotes that x is mad ill • The existential quantifier  means “there exists” • The statement “Some emcee can bust a rhyme” can be written more formally as: • y  E, B(y) • Where E is the set of emcees and B(y) denotes that y can bust a rhyme

  25. Negating quantified statements • When doing a negation, negate the predicate and change the universal quantifier to existential or vice versa • Formally: • ~(x, P(x))  x, ~P(x) • ~(x, P(x))  x, ~P(x) • Thus, the negation of "Every dragon breathes fire" is "There is one dragon that does not breathe fire"

  26. Vacuously true • Any statement with a universal quantifier whose domain is the empty set is vacuously true • When we talk about "all things" and there's nothing there, we can say anything we want • "All mythological creatures are real." • Every single one of the (of which there are none) is real

  27. Conditionals • Recall: • Statement: p q • Contrapositive: ~q  ~p • Converse: q  p • Inverse: ~p  ~q • These can be extended to universal statements: • Statement: x, P(x)  Q(x) • Contrapositive: x, ~Q(x)  ~P(x) • Converse: x, Q(x)  P(x) • Inverse: x, ~P(x)  ~Q(x) • Similar properties relating a statement equating a statement to its contrapositive (but not to its converse and inverse) apply

  28. Necessary and sufficient • p is a sufficient condition for q means pq • p is a necessary condition for q means qp • These come over into universal conditional statements as well: • x, P(x) is a sufficient condition for Q(x) means x, P(x) Q(x) • x, P(x) is a necessary condition for Q(x) means x, Q(x) P(x)

  29. Multiple quantifiers • With multiple quantifiers, we imagine that corresponding “actions” happen in the same order as the quantifiers • The action for x  A is something like, “pick any x from A you want” • Since a “for all” must work on everything, it doesn’t matter which you pick • The action for y  B is something like, “find some y from B” • Since a “there exists” only needs one to work, you should try to find the one that matches

  30. Negating or changing multiple quantifiers • For negation, • Simply switch every  to  and every  to  • Then negate the predicate • Changing the order of quantifiers can change the truth of the whole statement but does not always • Furthermore, quantifiers of the same type are commutative: • You can reorder a sequence of  quantifiers however you want • The same goes for  • Once they start overlapping, however, you can’t be sure anymore

  31. Quantification in arguments • Universal instantiation: If a property is true for everything in a domain (universal quantifier), it is true for any specific thing in the domain • Universal modus ponens: • x, P(x)  Q(x) • P(a) for some particular a • Q(a) • Universal modus tollens: • x, P(x)  Q(x) • ~Q(a) for some particular a • ~P(a)

  32. Proofs Review

  33. Proving existential statements and disproving universal ones • To prove x  D  P(x) we need to find at least one element of D that makes P(x) true • To disprove x  D, P(x)  Q(x), we need to find an x that makes P(x) true and Q(x) false

  34. Proving universal statements • If the domain is finite, we can use the method of exhaustion, by simply trying every element • Otherwise, we can use a direct proof • Express the statement to be proved in the form x  D,if P(x) then Q(x) • Suppose that x is some specific (but arbitrarily chosen) element of D for which P(x) is true • Show that the conclusion Q(x) is true by using definitions, other theorems, and the rules for logical inference • Direct proofs should start with the word Proof, end with the word QED, and have a justification next to every step in the argument • For proofs with cases, number each case clearly and show that you have proved the conclusion for all possible cases

  35. Definitions • If n is an integer, then: • n is even   k  Z  n = 2k • n is odd   k  Z  n = 2k + 1 • If n is an integer where n > 1, then: • n is prime   r  Z+,  s  Z+, if n = rs, then r = 1 or s = 1 • n is composite   r  Z+,  s  Z+  n = rs and r  1 and s  1 • r is rational   a, b Z  r = a/b and b  0 • For n, d  Z, • n is divisible by d  k Z  n = dk • For any real number x, the floor of x, written x, is defined as follows: • x = the unique integer n such that n ≤ x < n + 1 • For any real number x, the ceiling of x, written x, is defined as follows: • x = the unique integer n such that n – 1 < x ≤ n

  36. Theorems • Unique factorization theorem: For any integer n > 1, there exist a positive integer k, distinct prime numbers p1, p2, …, pk, and positive integers e1, e2, …, ek such that • Quotient remainder theorem: For any integer n and any positive integer d, there exist unique integers q and r such that • n = dq + r and 0 ≤ r < d

  37. A proof by cases • Theorem: for all integers n, 3n2 + n + 14 is even • How could we prove this using cases? • Be careful with formatting

  38. Quiz

  39. Upcoming

  40. Next time… • Exam 1!

  41. Reminders • Exam 1 is Monday in class!

More Related