Is This Proof that 1=2 Valid or Fallacious?

In summary: B] The theorem starts "there exists an X belonging to reals such that (x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4". If this is not true then the conclusion is false because the hypothesis is false! So, what is this x? In other words, solve x^2- x- 2= x^2- 4. I will tell you right now that the hypothesis is true but once you have determined what that x is, you will see why dividing both sides of the equation by x- 2 is an error.
  • #1
Enjoicube
49
1

Homework Statement


Alright here it is:

Theorem: if there exists an x belonging to reals such that (x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4 then 1=2.

Remark: note that there is such an x belonging to reals.

Proof:

1) by hypothesis assume there exists an X belonging to reals such that (x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4

2)factor each side,

3)resulting in (x-2)(x+1)=(x-2)(x+2)

4)divide each side by (x-2),

5)resulting in x+1=x+2

6)subtract x from each side, resulting in 1=2

1) What terminology (quantifiers, predicates) can be used to express the entire statements 1,3,5

2)Why is this proof fallacious, refer to statements by their numbers. Hint: What are the domains for each statement?



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Ok, my attempt at part one (is
Theorem: ([tex]\exists[/tex]X [tex]\in[/tex][tex]\Re[/tex]) [tex]\right arrow[/tex] ((x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4))

Statement 1: [tex]\exists[/tex]X [tex]\in[/tex][tex]\Re[/tex] ((x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4))

Statement 3:[tex]\exists[/tex]X [tex]\in[/tex][tex]\Re[/tex](x-2)(x+1)=(x-2)(x+2)

Statement 5:[tex]\exists[/tex]X [tex]\in[/tex][tex]\Re[/tex]x+1=x+2

For part 2, i am quite lost, the problem is the use of existential quantifier. My guess is a division by zero somewhere, but otherwise, I need a bigger hint.

Homework Statement


 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Enjoicube said:

Homework Statement


Alright here it is:

Theorem: if there exists an x belonging to reals such that (x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4 then 1=2.

Remark: note that there is such an x belonging to reals.

Proof:

1) by hypothesis assume there exists an X belonging to reals such that (x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4

2)factor each side,

3)resulting in (x-2)(x+1)=(x-2)(x+2)

4)divide each side by (x-2),

5)resulting in x+1=x+2

6)subtract x from each side, resulting in 1=2

1) What terminology (quantifiers, predicates) can be used to express the entire statements 1,3,5

2)Why is this proof fallacious, refer to statements by their numbers. Hint: What are the domains for each statement?



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Ok, my attempt at part one (is
Theorem: ([tex]\exists[/tex]X [tex]\in[/tex][tex]\Re[/tex]) [tex]\right arrow[/tex] ((x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4))

Statement 1: [tex]\exists[/tex]X [tex]\in[/tex][tex]\Re[/tex] ((x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4))

Statement 3:[tex]\exists[/tex]X [tex]\in[/tex][tex]\Re[/tex](x-2)(x+1)=(x-2)(x+2)

Statement 5:[tex]\exists[/tex]X [tex]\in[/tex][tex]\Re[/tex]x+1=x+2

For part 2, i am quite lost, the problem is the use of existential quantifier. My guess is a division by zero somewhere, but otherwise, I need a bigger hint.

Homework Statement

The theorem starts "there exists an X belonging to reals such that (x^2)-x-2=(x^2)-4". Okay, is that true? If not then the conclusion is false because the hypothesis is false! If it is true, what is that x? In other words, solve x^2- x- 2= x^2- 4. I will tell you right now that the hypothesis is true but once you have determined what that x is, you will see why dividing both sides of the equation by x- 2 is an error.
 
  • #3
Aha! got it. Thank you so much for that. In retrospect I really should have noticed this x value.
 
  • #4
In retrospect, I should have been a genius!
 
  • #5
Actually, in logic, when there are several hypotheses, if any single hypothesis is false the implication (hypotheses imply conclusion) is always true, simply by the nature of the formal definition of a valid argument.

the problem with this "proof" is simply that dividing by [tex] x-2 [/tex] is division by zero, since 2 is a solution to [tex] x^2 - x -2 = x^4 - 4 [/tex]
 

FAQ: Is This Proof that 1=2 Valid or Fallacious?

What is discrete fallacious proof?

Discrete fallacious proof is a type of argument that appears to be logically valid but is actually flawed due to incorrect assumptions or faulty reasoning.

What are some common examples of discrete fallacious proof?

Some common examples of discrete fallacious proof include circular reasoning, false dilemma, and straw man arguments.

How can one identify a discrete fallacious proof?

One can identify a discrete fallacious proof by examining the underlying assumptions and logic of the argument and looking for any flaws or errors.

What are the potential consequences of using a discrete fallacious proof?

The use of discrete fallacious proof can lead to incorrect conclusions being drawn and can undermine the credibility of the person making the argument.

How can one avoid using discrete fallacious proof in their own arguments?

To avoid using discrete fallacious proof, one should carefully examine their own arguments and logic, seek out alternative perspectives, and be open to feedback and criticism.

Back
Top