Contrapositive of theorem and issue with proof

  • I
  • Thread starter psie
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Logic
In summary, the contrapositive of a theorem states that if the conclusion is false, then the hypothesis must also be false. This is logically equivalent to the original theorem, but issues may arise in proofs if the contrapositive is not correctly formulated or if assumptions are misapplied, leading to invalid conclusions. Careful attention to detail is essential to ensure that the proof accurately reflects the relationships between the hypothesis and conclusion.
  • #1
psie
269
32
TL;DR Summary
I'm stuck on a contrapositive of a theorem and a logical issue with a proof. It concerns the statement that the image of a connected set is connected under a continuous map.
Consider the following theorem:

Theorem Suppose that ##f:X\to Y## is a continuous map between two topological spaces ##X## and ##Y##. Then ##f(X)## is connected if ##X## is.

First, I don't know how to take the contrapositive of this statement. I'm not sure if the opening hypothesis, that is, ##f## is continuous, remains outside. Because the way this is proved in the text I'm reading is by assuming ##f(X)## is disconnected and then using continuity to show that ##X## is also disconnected. Since the author uses the continuity assumption, it seems like that is not a part of the statement that one takes the contrapositive of.

Yet, I saw someone claim,

Claim If a function has a connected domain ##X## and a disconnected range ##f(X)##, then the function is not continuous on ##X##.

So in this claim it seems like that the continuity is actually negated as well. I'm confused and I'm now doubting the validity of the proof of the theorem. What is correct and what isn't?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
A: A function f(X) is a continuous map between two topological spaces X and f(X)
B: f(X) is connected
C: X is connected

If C and Not B, then Not A.

So the original sentence is When A: Then B, if C.
This can be rewritten: If A, then (if C then B)
The contrapositive: If not (if C then B) then not A.

(if C then B) is false only when C is true and B is false
so: not (if C then B) == ( C and not B)
Thus: If not (if C then B) then not A == if (C and not B) then not A

QED
 
  • Like
Likes psie
  • #3
psie said:
So in this claim it seems like that the continuity is actually negated as well. I'm confused and I'm now doubting the validity of the proof of the theorem. What is correct and what isn't?
The theorem itself is of the form:

Suppose ##f## is continuous, then property A holds.

The contrapositive of that is:

If property A does not hold, then ##f## is not continuous.

That's probably the answer for the contrapositive of the theorem.

In this case, property A is also an "if-then":

If ##X## is connected, then ##f(X)## is connected.

The contrapositive of property A is:

If ##f(X)## is not connected, then ##X## is not connected. But, that's not the contrapositive of the theorem.
 
  • Like
Likes psie
  • #4
Hmm, ok. I'm still uncertain about that proof. Is it correct to use the continuity of the function when proving the contrapositive of the theorem?
 
  • #5
psie said:
Hmm, ok. I'm still uncertain about that proof. Is it correct to use the continuity of the function when proving the contrapositive of the theorem?
What I said was that there is a difference between the contrapositive (statement) of the theorem and the contrapositive (statement) of a condition or property used in the theorem.

In that sense, we are arguing about a definition of what precisely the contrapositive means in this case. There's no error in either argument that is not based on an interpretation of the question.
 
  • #6
Let ##A##, ##B## and ##C## be propositions. Then the following formulas are equivalent.
\begin{align*}
&A\to (B\to C)\\
&A\land B\to C\\
&B\to (A\to C)\end{align*}Therefore there are many ways to construct equivalent statements using contrapositive. Below ##F\equiv G## means that ##F## and ##G## are equivalent.
\begin{align*}
A\to (B\to C)&\quad\equiv\quad\neg(B\to C)\to\neg A&&\equiv\quad B\land\neg C\to\neg A\tag{1}\\
A\to (B\to C)&\quad\equiv\quad A\to(\neg C\to\neg B)\tag{2}\\
A\land B\to C&\quad\equiv\quad\neg C\to\neg(A\land B)&&\equiv\quad\neg C\to\neg A\lor\neg B\tag{3}\\
B\to (A\to C)&\quad\equiv\quad\neg(A\to C)\to\neg B&&\equiv\quad A\land\neg C\to\neg B\tag{4}\\
B\to (A\to C)&\quad\equiv\quad B\to(\neg C\to\neg A)\tag{5}\end{align*}Usually contrapositive is applied when the assumption and the conclusion of the implication are atomic rather than compound propositions. This means that proving formulas at the end of lines (1) and (4) is somewhat unusual but still valid way to prove ##A\to(B\to C)##. I believe a more common way is to leave one of the assumptions ##A## or ##B## unchanged and then take the contrapositive of the remaining implication as in lines (2) and (5).

In this situation if we denote "##f## is continuous" by ##A##, "##X## is connected" by ##B## and "##f(X)## is connected" by ##C##, then the text proved formula in (2). The second claim in post 1 is (1).
 
  • Like
Likes psie and PeroK

FAQ: Contrapositive of theorem and issue with proof

What is the contrapositive of a theorem?

The contrapositive of a theorem is a statement that reverses and negates both the hypothesis and the conclusion of the original theorem. If the original theorem is "If P, then Q," its contrapositive is "If not Q, then not P." Both statements are logically equivalent, meaning if one is true, the other must also be true.

Why is the contrapositive useful in proofs?

The contrapositive is useful in proofs because it often provides a more straightforward or intuitive path to demonstrating the truth of a theorem. Since the contrapositive is logically equivalent to the original statement, proving the contrapositive is as valid as proving the original statement.

How do you prove a theorem using its contrapositive?

To prove a theorem using its contrapositive, you first restate the theorem in its contrapositive form. Then, you proceed to prove this contrapositive statement directly. If the contrapositive is proven true, the original theorem is also true by logical equivalence.

What are common issues encountered when using the contrapositive in proofs?

Common issues include misunderstanding the logical equivalence between a statement and its contrapositive, incorrectly negating the hypothesis or conclusion, and failing to properly structure the proof. Additionally, some proofs may become unnecessarily complex when approached through the contrapositive rather than directly.

Can a theorem be disproven by disproving its contrapositive?

Yes, if the contrapositive of a theorem is found to be false, the original theorem is also false. This is because the contrapositive and the original statement are logically equivalent; if one is false, the other cannot be true. Disproving the contrapositive provides a valid method for disproving the original theorem.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
794
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
900
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
878
Changing the Statement Combinatorial proofs & Contraposition
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
805
Back
Top