Is This Mathematical Proof Logically Sound?

  • MHB
  • Thread starter solakis1
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
In summary: I appreciate all the help I have received from the volunteers on this site. In summary, the conversation is about a proof that involves the statement \forall A\forall B[ 0<AB\Longrightarrow (0<A\wedge 0<B)\vee(A<0\wedge B<0) and whether it is correct or not. The proof involves showing a contradiction between statements (1)-(5) and concludes that the statement is correct.
  • #1
solakis1
422
0
Is the following proof ,proving \(\displaystyle \forall A\forall B[ 0<AB\Longrightarrow (0<A\wedge 0<B)\vee(A<0\wedge B<0)\),correct??

Proof:

Let, 0<ab

Let, ~(0<a& 0<b)...............1

Let , ~(a<0&b<0)...............2

But 0<ab => ~(ab=0) => ~(a=0) and ~(b=0) => ~(a=0)......3

For ,\(\displaystyle 0<a \Longrightarrow\frac{1}{a}<0\Longrightarrow(ab)\frac{1}{a}<0\frac{1}{a}\Longrightarrow b<0\),since 0<ab, \(\displaystyle \Longrightarrow 0<a\wedge0<b\) a contradiction by using (2)

Hence ~(0<a)................4

In a similar way we prove : a<0 => (a<0&b<0) ,a contradiction by using (3)

Hence ~(a<0).................5

Thus from (4) and (5) we have :

~(0<a) and ~(a<0) => ~( 0<a or a<0) => a=o ,a contradictio by using (3)

Hence ~~(0<a & 0<b) => 0<a & 0<b => (0<a &0<b)or( a<0 & b<0)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hey Solakis!

I have just noticed that you have 160 posts and 0 posts in which you have thanked anyone.
For the record, apparently your posts got thanked 11 times.

Is there any reason you expect that anyone wants to respond to your posts, considering that this is a site where people are only volunteering?
 
  • #3
I like Serena said:
Hey Solakis!

I have just noticed that you have 160 posts and 0 posts in which you have thanked anyone.
For the record, apparently your posts got thanked 11 times.

Is there any reason you expect that anyone wants to respond to your posts, considering that this is a site where people are only volunteering?

Thanks for reminding me
 

FAQ: Is This Mathematical Proof Logically Sound?

What is the definition of a "proved proof" in science?

A "proved proof" in science refers to a scientific theory or hypothesis that has been extensively tested and proven through rigorous experimentation and analysis.

How is the accuracy of a "proved proof" determined?

The accuracy of a "proved proof" is determined by the consistency of its results when tested multiple times, as well as its ability to make accurate predictions and explanations based on existing evidence.

Can a "proved proof" ever be proven wrong?

Yes, while a "proved proof" may have been extensively tested and proven to be accurate, it is always possible for new evidence or data to emerge that may contradict or disprove it. In science, no theory or hypothesis is ever considered to be 100% proven or infallible.

What role do peer reviews play in validating a "proved proof"?

Peer reviews play a crucial role in validating a "proved proof" as they involve other experts in the field critically examining and evaluating the evidence and methodology used in the proof. This helps to ensure that the proof is accurate and unbiased.

How can non-scientists determine if a "proved proof" is correct?

Non-scientists can determine if a "proved proof" is correct by looking at the evidence and methodology used in the proof and evaluating it based on scientific principles. It is also helpful to seek out multiple sources and perspectives on the topic to get a well-rounded understanding of the proof.

Back
Top