id
stringlengths
11
15
title
stringlengths
7
171
problem
stringlengths
9
4.33k
solution
stringlengths
6
19k
problem_wikitext
stringlengths
9
4.42k
solution_wikitext
stringlengths
7
19.1k
proof_title
stringlengths
9
171
theorem_url
stringlengths
34
198
proof_url
stringlengths
36
198
categories
listlengths
0
9
theorem_references
listlengths
0
36
proof_references
listlengths
0
253
proofwiki-4200
Gelfond-Schneider Theorem
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be algebraic numbers (possibly complex) such that $\alpha \notin \set {0, 1}$. Let $\beta$ be irrational, that is: :$\beta \notin \Q$ This includes $\beta$ being imaginary or complex. Then any value of $\alpha^\beta$ is transcendental.
Let $\alpha$ be an algebraic number such that $\alpha \ne 0$ and $\alpha \ne 1$. Let $\beta$ be an algebraic number such that some value of $\alpha^\beta$ is algebraic. The result will follow if we can show that $\beta \in \Q$. We treat only the special case that $\alpha, \beta \in \R$ and $\alpha > 0$, assuming that $...
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Algebraic Number|algebraic numbers]] (possibly [[Definition:Complex Number|complex]]) such that $\alpha \notin \set {0, 1}$. Let $\beta$ be [[Definition:Irrational Number|irrational]], that is: :$\beta \notin \Q$ This includes $\beta$ being [[Definition:Wholly Imaginary|imagina...
Let $\alpha$ be an [[Definition:Algebraic Number|algebraic number]] such that $\alpha \ne 0$ and $\alpha \ne 1$. Let $\beta$ be an [[Definition:Algebraic Number|algebraic number]] such that some value of $\alpha^\beta$ is [[Definition:Algebraic Number|algebraic]]. The result will follow if we can show that $\beta \in...
Gelfond-Schneider Theorem
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Gelfond-Schneider_Theorem
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Gelfond-Schneider_Theorem
[ "Gelfond-Schneider Theorem", "Transcendental Number Theory", "Analysis" ]
[ "Definition:Algebraic Number", "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Irrational Number", "Definition:Complex Number/Wholly Imaginary", "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Transcendental Number" ]
[ "Definition:Algebraic Number", "Definition:Algebraic Number", "Definition:Algebraic Number", "Definition:Algebraic Number", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Element", "Definition:Algebraic Number", "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Sufficiently Large", "Definition:S...
proofwiki-4201
Associative Algebra has Multiplicative Inverses iff Unitary Division Algebra
Let $\struct {A_R, \oplus}$ be an associative algebra over the ring $A_R$. Then: :$\struct {A_R, \oplus}$ has a unique multiplicative inverse for every non-zero $a \in A_R$ {{iff}}: :$\struct {A_R, \oplus}$ is a unitary division algebra.
Let $A = \struct {A_R, \oplus}$ be a unitary division algebra whose zero is $\mathbf 0_A$. From the unitary nature of $A$ we have that $\oplus$ has a unit $1$ such that: :$\forall a \in A_R, a \ne \mathbf 0_A: a \oplus 1 = a = 1 \oplus a$ From the division algebra nature of $A$ we have that $R$ is a field and that: : $...
Let $\struct {A_R, \oplus}$ be an [[Definition:Associative Algebra|associative algebra]] over the [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]] $A_R$. Then: :$\struct {A_R, \oplus}$ has a unique [[Definition:Multiplicative Inverse|multiplicative inverse]] for every [[Definition:Zero Vector|non-zero]] $a \in A_R$ {{iff}...
Let $A = \struct {A_R, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Unitary Division Algebra|unitary division algebra]] whose [[Definition:Zero Vector|zero]] is $\mathbf 0_A$. From the [[Definition:Unitary Algebra|unitary]] nature of $A$ we have that $\oplus$ has a [[Definition:Unit of Algebra|unit]] $1$ such that: :$\forall a \in A_R,...
Associative Algebra has Multiplicative Inverses iff Unitary Division Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Associative_Algebra_has_Multiplicative_Inverses_iff_Unitary_Division_Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Associative_Algebra_has_Multiplicative_Inverses_iff_Unitary_Division_Algebra
[ "Associative Algebras", "Multiplicative Inverses", "Unitary Division Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Multiplicative Inverse", "Definition:Zero Vector", "Definition:Unitary Division Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Unitary Division Algebra", "Definition:Zero Vector", "Definition:Unital Algebra", "Definition:Unit of Algebra", "Definition:Division Algebra", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Associative Operation", "Definition:Multiplicative Inverse", "Definition:Multiplicative Invers...
proofwiki-4202
Norm of Unit of Normed Division Algebra
Let $\struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a normed division algebra. Let the unit of $\struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be $1_A$. Then: :$\norm {1_A} = 1$ where $\norm {1_A}$ denotes the norm of $1_A$.
By definition: :$\forall a, b \in A_F: \norm {a \oplus b} = \norm a \norm b$ So: :$\norm {1_A} = \norm {1_A \oplus 1_A} = \norm {1_A} \norm {1_A}$ So $\norm {1_A} \in \R$ is idempotent under real multiplication. From Idempotent Elements of Ring with No Proper Zero Divisors, only $0 \in \R$ and $1 \in \R$ fit that bill....
Let $\struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Normed Division Algebra|normed division algebra]]. Let the [[Definition:Unit of Algebra|unit]] of $\struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be $1_A$. Then: :$\norm {1_A} = 1$ where $\norm {1_A}$ denotes the [[Definition:Norm on Vector Space|norm]] of $1_A$.
By definition: :$\forall a, b \in A_F: \norm {a \oplus b} = \norm a \norm b$ So: :$\norm {1_A} = \norm {1_A \oplus 1_A} = \norm {1_A} \norm {1_A}$ So $\norm {1_A} \in \R$ is [[Definition:Idempotent Element|idempotent]] under [[Definition:Real Multiplication|real multiplication]]. From [[Idempotent Elements of Ring ...
Norm of Unit of Normed Division Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Norm_of_Unit_of_Normed_Division_Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Norm_of_Unit_of_Normed_Division_Algebra
[ "Normed Division Algebras", "Norm Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Unit of Algebra", "Definition:Norm/Vector Space" ]
[ "Definition:Idempotence/Element", "Definition:Multiplication/Real Numbers", "Idempotent Elements of Ring with No Proper Zero Divisors", "Definition:Norm/Vector Space" ]
proofwiki-4203
Commutator on Algebra is Alternating Bilinear Mapping
Let $\struct {A_R, \oplus}$ be an algebra over a ring. Then the commutator on $\struct {A_R, \oplus}$ is an alternating bilinear mapping: :$\forall a, b \in A_R: \sqbrk {a, b} = -\sqbrk {b, a}$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \sqbrk {a, b} | r = a \oplus b - b \oplus a | c = }} {{eqn | r = -b \oplus a + a \oplus b | c = }} {{eqn | r = -b \oplus a - \paren {-\paren {a \oplus b} } | c = }} {{eqn | r = -\paren {b \oplus a - a \oplus b} | c = }} {{eqn | r = -\sqbrk {b, a} | c = ...
Let $\struct {A_R, \oplus}$ be an [[Definition:Algebra over Ring|algebra over a ring]]. Then the [[Definition:Commutator on Algebra|commutator]] on $\struct {A_R, \oplus}$ is an [[Definition:Alternating Bilinear Mapping|alternating bilinear mapping]]: :$\forall a, b \in A_R: \sqbrk {a, b} = -\sqbrk {b, a}$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \sqbrk {a, b} | r = a \oplus b - b \oplus a | c = }} {{eqn | r = -b \oplus a + a \oplus b | c = }} {{eqn | r = -b \oplus a - \paren {-\paren {a \oplus b} } | c = }} {{eqn | r = -\paren {b \oplus a - a \oplus b} | c = }} {{eqn | r = -\sqbrk {b, a} | c = ...
Commutator on Algebra is Alternating Bilinear Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Commutator_on_Algebra_is_Alternating_Bilinear_Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Commutator_on_Algebra_is_Alternating_Bilinear_Mapping
[ "Algebras", "Alternating Bilinear Mappings", "Commutators" ]
[ "Definition:Algebra over Ring", "Definition:Commutator/Algebra", "Definition:Alternating Bilinear Mapping" ]
[]
proofwiki-4204
Quaternions Defined by Ordered Pairs
Consider the quaternions $\Bbb H$ as numbers in the form: : $a \mathbf 1 + b \mathbf i + c \mathbf j + d \mathbf k$ where: : $a, b, c, d$ are real numbers; : $\mathbf 1, \mathbf i, \mathbf j, \mathbf k$ are entities related to each other in the following way: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \mathbf i \mathbf j = - \math...
First we identify the following: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | n = 1 | l = \mathbf 1 | r = \tuple {1, 0} | c = }} {{eqn | n = 2 | l = \mathbf i | r = \tuple {i, 0} | c = }} {{eqn | n = 3 | l = \mathbf j | r = \tuple {0, i} | c = }} {{eqn | n = 4 | l = \mathbf k ...
Consider the [[Definition:Quaternion|quaternions]] $\Bbb H$ as numbers in the form: : $a \mathbf 1 + b \mathbf i + c \mathbf j + d \mathbf k$ where: : $a, b, c, d$ are [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]]; : $\mathbf 1, \mathbf i, \mathbf j, \mathbf k$ are entities related to each other in the following way: {{beg...
First we identify the following: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | n = 1 | l = \mathbf 1 | r = \tuple {1, 0} | c = }} {{eqn | n = 2 | l = \mathbf i | r = \tuple {i, 0} | c = }} {{eqn | n = 3 | l = \mathbf j | r = \tuple {0, i} | c = }} {{eqn | n = 4 | l = \mathbf k ...
Quaternions Defined by Ordered Pairs
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Quaternions_Defined_by_Ordered_Pairs
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Quaternions_Defined_by_Ordered_Pairs
[ "Quaternions" ]
[ "Definition:Quaternion", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Quaternion", "Definition:Ordered Pair", "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Quaternion/Multiplication", "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Complex Conjugate", "Definition:Logical Equivalence" ]
[ "Quaternion Multiplication" ]
proofwiki-4205
Multiplicative Inverse in Nicely Normed Star-Algebra
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a nicely normed $*$-algebra whose conjugation is denoted $*$. Let $a \in A$. Then the multiplicative inverse of $a$ is given by: :$a^{-1} = \dfrac {a^*} {\norm a^2}$ where: :$a^*$ is the conjugate of $a$ :$\norm a$ is the norm of $a$.
For the result to hold, we need to show that $a \oplus \dfrac {a^*} {\norm a^2} = 1 = \dfrac {a^*} {\norm a^2} \oplus a$. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | o = | r = a \oplus \dfrac {a^*} {\norm a^2} | c = }} {{eqn | r = a \oplus a^* \cdot \dfrac 1 {\norm a^2} | c = }} {{eqn | r = \norm a^2 \cdot \dfrac 1 {\no...
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra|nicely normed $*$-algebra]] whose [[Definition:Conjugation on Algebra|conjugation]] is denoted $*$. Let $a \in A$. Then the [[Definition:Multiplicative Inverse|multiplicative inverse]] of $a$ is given by: :$a^{-1} = \dfrac {a^*} {\norm a^2}...
For the result to hold, we need to show that $a \oplus \dfrac {a^*} {\norm a^2} = 1 = \dfrac {a^*} {\norm a^2} \oplus a$. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | o = | r = a \oplus \dfrac {a^*} {\norm a^2} | c = }} {{eqn | r = a \oplus a^* \cdot \dfrac 1 {\norm a^2} | c = }} {{eqn | r = \norm a^2 \cdot \dfrac 1 {\n...
Multiplicative Inverse in Nicely Normed Star-Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplicative_Inverse_in_Nicely_Normed_Star-Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplicative_Inverse_in_Nicely_Normed_Star-Algebra
[ "Nicely Normed Star-Algebras", "Multiplicative Inverses" ]
[ "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Conjugation on Algebra", "Definition:Multiplicative Inverse", "Definition:Conjugation on Algebra/Conjugate", "Definition:Norm/Vector Space" ]
[ "Definition:Associative Operation" ]
proofwiki-4206
Nicely Normed Alternative Algebra is Normed Division Algebra
$A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a nicely normed $*$-algebra which is also an alternative algebra. Then $A$ is a normed division algebra.
Let $a, b \in A$. Then all of $a, b, a^*, b^*$ can be generated by $\map \Im a$ and $\map \Im b$. {{explain|Prove the above statement.}} So as $A$ is an alternative algebra, it follows that $\oplus$ is associative for $a, b, a^*, b^*$. So: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \norm {a b}^2 | r = \paren {a \oplus b} \oplus \...
$A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra|nicely normed $*$-algebra]] which is also an [[Definition:Alternative Algebra|alternative algebra]]. Then $A$ is a [[Definition:Normed Division Algebra|normed division algebra]].
Let $a, b \in A$. Then all of $a, b, a^*, b^*$ can be generated by $\map \Im a$ and $\map \Im b$. {{explain|Prove the above statement.}} So as $A$ is an [[Definition:Alternative Algebra|alternative algebra]], it follows that $\oplus$ is [[Definition:Associative Operation|associative]] for $a, b, a^*, b^*$. So: {{b...
Nicely Normed Alternative Algebra is Normed Division Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Nicely_Normed_Alternative_Algebra_is_Normed_Division_Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Nicely_Normed_Alternative_Algebra_is_Normed_Division_Algebra
[ "Nicely Normed Star-Algebras", "Alternative Algebras", "Normed Division Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Alternative Algebra", "Definition:Normed Division Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Alternative Algebra", "Definition:Associative Operation", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Associative Operation" ]
proofwiki-4207
Artin's Theorem on Alternative Algebras
Let $A = \struct {A_R, \oplus}$ be an algebra over the ring $R$ such that $A$ is ''not'' a boolean algebra. Then $A$ is alternative {{iff}}: :$\forall a, b \in A: \paren {a \oplus a} \oplus b = a \oplus \paren {a \oplus b}$ :$\forall a, b \in A: \paren {b \oplus a} \oplus a = b \oplus \paren {a \oplus a}$
When $A$ is So suppose that: :$\forall a, b \in A: \paren {a \oplus a} \oplus b = a \oplus \paren {a \oplus b}$ :$\forall a, b \in A: \paren {b \oplus a} \oplus a = b \oplus \paren {a \oplus a}$ Then: :$\sqbrk {a, a, b} = 0$ :$\sqbrk {b, a, a} = 0$ where $\sqbrk {a, a, b}$ denotes the associator of $a, b \in A_R$. Now...
Let $A = \struct {A_R, \oplus}$ be an [[Definition:Algebra over Ring|algebra over the ring]] $R$ such that $A$ is ''not'' a [[Definition:Boolean Algebra|boolean algebra]]. Then $A$ is [[Definition:Alternative Algebra|alternative]] {{iff}}: :$\forall a, b \in A: \paren {a \oplus a} \oplus b = a \oplus \paren {a \oplus...
When $A$ is So suppose that: :$\forall a, b \in A: \paren {a \oplus a} \oplus b = a \oplus \paren {a \oplus b}$ :$\forall a, b \in A: \paren {b \oplus a} \oplus a = b \oplus \paren {a \oplus a}$ Then: :$\sqbrk {a, a, b} = 0$ :$\sqbrk {b, a, a} = 0$ where $\sqbrk {a, a, b}$ denotes the [[Definition:Associator|asso...
Artin's Theorem on Alternative Algebras
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Artin's_Theorem_on_Alternative_Algebras
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Artin's_Theorem_on_Alternative_Algebras
[ "Alternative Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Algebra over Ring", "Definition:Boolean Algebra", "Definition:Alternative Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Associator" ]
proofwiki-4208
Real Numbers form Algebra
The set of real numbers $\R$ forms an algebra over the field of real numbers. This algebra is: :$(1): \quad$ An associative algebra. :$(2): \quad$ A commutative algebra. :$(3): \quad$ A normed division algebra. :$(4): \quad$ A nicely normed $*$-algebra whose $*$ operator is the identity mapping. :$(5): \quad$ A real $*...
=== Construction of Algebra === From Real Numbers form Field, $\struct {\R, +, \times}$ is a field. Let this be expressed as $\struct {\R, +_\R, \times_\R}$ in order to call attention to the precise scope of the operators. From Real Numbers form Vector Space, we have that $\struct {\R^1, +, \cdot}_\R$ is a vector space...
The [[Definition:Real Number|set of real numbers]] $\R$ forms an [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra]] over the [[Definition:Field of Real Numbers|field of real numbers]]. This [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra]] is: :$(1): \quad$ An [[Definition:Associative Algebra|associative algebra]]. :$(2): \quad$ A [[D...
=== Construction of Algebra === From [[Real Numbers form Field]], $\struct {\R, +, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]]. Let this be expressed as $\struct {\R, +_\R, \times_\R}$ in order to call attention to the precise scope of the operators. From [[Real Numbers form Vector Space]], we have t...
Real Numbers form Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Numbers_form_Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Numbers_form_Algebra
[ "Real Numbers", "Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Field of Real Numbers", "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Defin...
[ "Real Numbers form Field", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Real Numbers form Vector Space", "Definition:Vector Space", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Definition:Addition/Real Numbers", "Real Numbers form Vector Space", "Definition:Real Number", "Definit...
proofwiki-4209
Real Numbers form Vector Space
The set of real numbers $\R$, with the operations of addition and multiplication, forms a vector space.
Let the field of real numbers be denoted $\struct {\R, +, \times}$. From Real Vector Space is Vector Space, we have that $\struct {\R^n, +, \cdot}$ is a vector space, where: :$\mathbf a + \mathbf b = \tuple {a_1 + b_1, a_2 + b_2, \ldots, a_n + b_n}$ :$\lambda \cdot \mathbf a = \tuple {\lambda \times a_1, \lambda \times...
The [[Definition:Real Number|set of real numbers]] $\R$, with the operations of [[Definition:Real Addition|addition]] and [[Definition:Real Multiplication|multiplication]], forms a [[Definition:Vector Space|vector space]].
Let the [[Definition:Field of Real Numbers|field of real numbers]] be denoted $\struct {\R, +, \times}$. From [[Real Vector Space is Vector Space]], we have that $\struct {\R^n, +, \cdot}$ is a [[Definition:Vector Space|vector space]], where: :$\mathbf a + \mathbf b = \tuple {a_1 + b_1, a_2 + b_2, \ldots, a_n + b_n}$...
Real Numbers form Vector Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Numbers_form_Vector_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Numbers_form_Vector_Space
[ "Linear Algebra", "Real Numbers", "Examples of Vector Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Addition/Real Numbers", "Definition:Multiplication/Real Numbers", "Definition:Vector Space" ]
[ "Definition:Field of Real Numbers", "Real Vector Space is Vector Space", "Definition:Vector Space", "Definition:Vector Space", "Definition:Vector Space", "Definition:Field of Real Numbers" ]
proofwiki-4210
Complex Numbers form Algebra
The set of complex numbers $\C$ forms an algebra over the field of real numbers. This algebra is: :$(1): \quad$ An associative algebra. :$(2): \quad$ A commutative algebra. :$(3): \quad$ A normed division algebra. :$(4): \quad$ A nicely normed $*$-algebra. However, $\C$ is not a real $*$-algebra.
The complex numbers $\C$ are formed by the Cayley-Dickson Construction from the real numbers $\R$. From Real Numbers form Algebra, we have that $\R$ forms: :$(1): \quad$ An associative algebra. :$(2): \quad$ A commutative algebra. :$(3): \quad$ A normed division algebra. :$(4): \quad$ A nicely normed $*$-algebra whose ...
The [[Definition:Complex Number|set of complex numbers]] $\C$ forms an [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra]] over the [[Definition:Field of Real Numbers|field of real numbers]]. This [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra]] is: :$(1): \quad$ An [[Definition:Associative Algebra|associative algebra]]. :$(2): \quad$...
The [[Definition:Complex Number|complex numbers]] $\C$ are formed by the [[Definition:Complex Number/Construction from Cayley-Dickson Construction|Cayley-Dickson Construction]] from the [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]] $\R$. From [[Real Numbers form Algebra]], we have that $\R$ forms: :$(1): \quad$ An [[Definit...
Complex Numbers form Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Numbers_form_Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Numbers_form_Algebra
[ "Complex Numbers", "Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Field of Real Numbers", "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "De...
[ "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Complex Number/Construction from Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Real Number", "Real Numbers form Algebra", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Nicely...
proofwiki-4211
Characterization of Class Membership
Let $A$ and $B$ be classes. Then: :$\forall A, B: \paren {A \in B \iff \exists x: \paren {A = x \land x \in B} }$ where $x$ is specifically a set.
Let $V$ denote the universal class. By Class is Subclass of Universal Class, $A \subseteq V$ and $B \subseteq V$. By definition of universal class, every element of $V$ is a set. Hence every element of $B$ is a set. So if $A \in B$, then it follows that $A$ is itself a set. Hence the result. {{qed}}
Let $A$ and $B$ be [[Definition:Class (Class Theory)|classes]]. Then: :$\forall A, B: \paren {A \in B \iff \exists x: \paren {A = x \land x \in B} }$ where $x$ is specifically a [[Definition:Set|set]].
Let $V$ denote the [[Definition:Universal Class|universal class]]. By [[Class is Subclass of Universal Class]], $A \subseteq V$ and $B \subseteq V$. By definition of [[Definition:Universal Class|universal class]], every [[Definition:Element of Class|element]] of $V$ is a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Hence every [[Definit...
Characterization of Class Membership
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Characterization_of_Class_Membership
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Characterization_of_Class_Membership
[ "Class Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Class (Class Theory)", "Definition:Set" ]
[ "Definition:Universal Class", "Class is Subclass of Universal Class", "Definition:Universal Class", "Definition:Element/Class", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Element/Class", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Set" ]
proofwiki-4212
Equality implies Substitution
Let $\map P x$ denote a Well-Formed Formula which contains $x$ as a free variable. Then the following are tautologies: :$\forall x: \paren {\map P x \iff \exists y: \paren {y = x \land \map P y} }$ :$\forall x: \paren {\map P x \iff \forall y: \paren {y = x \implies \map P y} }$ Note that when $y$ is substituted for $x...
{{questionable|Inelegant and unclear to the point of soliciting purging}} By Universal Affirmative implies Particular Affirmative iff First Predicate is not Vacuous: :$\paren {\exists y: y = x \land \forall y: \paren {y = x \implies \map P x} } \implies \exists y: \paren {y = x \land \map P x}$ Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eq...
Let $\map P x$ denote a [[Definition:Well-Formed Formula|Well-Formed Formula]] which contains $x$ as a [[Definition:Free Variable|free variable]]. Then the following are [[Definition:Tautology|tautologies]]: :$\forall x: \paren {\map P x \iff \exists y: \paren {y = x \land \map P y} }$ :$\forall x: \paren {\map P x \...
{{questionable|Inelegant and unclear to the point of soliciting purging}} By [[Universal Affirmative implies Particular Affirmative iff First Predicate is not Vacuous]]: :$\paren {\exists y: y = x \land \forall y: \paren {y = x \implies \map P x} } \implies \exists y: \paren {y = x \land \map P x}$ Then: {{begin-eqn}...
Equality implies Substitution
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equality_implies_Substitution
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equality_implies_Substitution
[ "Predicate Logic" ]
[ "Definition:Well-Formed Formula", "Definition:Free Variable", "Definition:Tautology", "Confusion of Bound Variables" ]
[ "Universal Affirmative implies Particular Affirmative iff First Predicate is not Vacuous", "Equality is Reflexive", "Existential Generalisation", "Modus Ponendo Ponens", "Substitutivity of Equality", "Universal Generalisation", "Hypothetical Syllogism", "Substitutivity of Equality", "Universal Gener...
proofwiki-4213
Fundamental Law of Universal Class
:$\forall x: x \in \Bbb U$ where: :$\Bbb U$ denotes the universal class :$x$ denotes a set.
From the definition of the universal class: :$\Bbb U = \set {x: x = x}$ From this, it follows immediately that: :$\forall x: \paren {x \in \Bbb U \iff x = x}$ From Equality is Reflexive, $x = x$ is a tautology. Thus the asserted statement is also tautologous. {{qed}}
:$\forall x: x \in \Bbb U$ where: :$\Bbb U$ denotes the [[Definition:Universal Class|universal class]] :$x$ denotes a [[Definition:Set|set]].
From the definition of the [[Definition:Universal Class|universal class]]: :$\Bbb U = \set {x: x = x}$ From this, it follows immediately that: :$\forall x: \paren {x \in \Bbb U \iff x = x}$ From [[Equality is Reflexive]], $x = x$ is a [[Definition:Tautology|tautology]]. Thus the asserted statement is also tautolog...
Fundamental Law of Universal Class
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Fundamental_Law_of_Universal_Class
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Fundamental_Law_of_Universal_Class
[ "Universal Class" ]
[ "Definition:Universal Class", "Definition:Set" ]
[ "Definition:Universal Class", "Equality is Reflexive", "Definition:Tautology" ]
proofwiki-4214
Cayley-Dickson Construction forms Star-Algebra
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a $*$-algebra. Let $A' = \struct {A'_F, \oplus'} = \struct {A, \oplus}^2$ be the algebra formed from $A$ by the Cayley-Dickson construction. Then $A'$ is also a $*$-algebra.
=== Bilinearity of $\oplus'$ === First we need to show that $\oplus'$ is bilinear. $(1): \quad$ Let $\tuple {a_1, b_1}, \tuple {a_2, b_2}, \tuple {c, d} \in A'$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | o = | r = \paren {\tuple {a_1, b_1} + \tuple {a_2, b_2} } \oplus' \tuple {c, d} | c = }} {{eqn | r = \tuple {a_1 + a...
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Star-Algebra|$*$-algebra]]. Let $A' = \struct {A'_F, \oplus'} = \struct {A, \oplus}^2$ be the [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra]] formed from $A$ by the [[Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction|Cayley-Dickson construction]]. Then $A'$ is also a [[Definition:Sta...
=== Bilinearity of $\oplus'$ === First we need to show that $\oplus'$ is [[Definition:Bilinear Mapping|bilinear]]. $(1): \quad$ Let $\tuple {a_1, b_1}, \tuple {a_2, b_2}, \tuple {c, d} \in A'$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | o = | r = \paren {\tuple {a_1, b_1} + \tuple {a_2, b_2} } \oplus' \tuple {c, d} ...
Cayley-Dickson Construction forms Star-Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cayley-Dickson_Construction_forms_Star-Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cayley-Dickson_Construction_forms_Star-Algebra
[ "Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Star-Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Star-Algebra", "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Star-Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Bilinear Mapping", "Definition:Bilinear Mapping", "Definition:Bilinear Mapping", "Definition:Bilinear Mapping", "Definition:Bilinear Mapping" ]
proofwiki-4215
Empty Set is Small
:$\O \in U$ where $U$ is the universal class.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \exists x | o = : | r = \forall y: \paren {\neg \paren {y \in x} } | c = {{axiom-link|the Empty Set|Set Theory}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \exists x | o = : | r = \forall y: \paren {y \in x \iff y \ne y} | c = Equality is Reflexive }} {{eqn | ll= \...
:$\O \in U$ where $U$ is the [[Definition:Universal Class|universal class]].
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \exists x | o = : | r = \forall y: \paren {\neg \paren {y \in x} } | c = {{axiom-link|the Empty Set|Set Theory}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \exists x | o = : | r = \forall y: \paren {y \in x \iff y \ne y} | c = [[Equality is Reflexive]] }} {{eqn | l...
Empty Set is Small
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Empty_Set_is_Small
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Empty_Set_is_Small
[ "Set Theory", "Class Theory", "Empty Set" ]
[ "Definition:Universal Class" ]
[ "Equality is Reflexive", "Characterization of Class Membership", "Fundamental Law of Universal Class" ]
proofwiki-4216
Algebra from Cayley-Dickson Construction is not Real Star-Algebra
Let $A$ be a $*$-algebra. Let $A'$ be constructed from $A$ using the Cayley-Dickson construction. Then $A'$ is not a real $*$-algebra.
Let the conjugation operator on $A$ be $*$. {{AimForCont}} $A'$ is a real $*$-algebra whose conjugation operator is $*'$. Then by definition: :$\forall a \in A': {a^*}' = a$ Let $a = \tuple {x, y} \in A'$. Then by definition of the Cayley-Dickson construction: :$x, y \in A$ By definition of the conjugation operator: :$...
Let $A$ be a [[Definition:Star-Algebra|$*$-algebra]]. Let $A'$ be constructed from $A$ using the [[Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction|Cayley-Dickson construction]]. Then $A'$ is not a [[Definition:Real Star-Algebra|real $*$-algebra]].
Let the [[Definition:Conjugation on Algebra|conjugation]] operator on $A$ be $*$. {{AimForCont}} $A'$ is a [[Definition:Real Star-Algebra|real $*$-algebra]] whose [[Definition:Conjugation on Algebra|conjugation]] operator is $*'$. Then by definition: :$\forall a \in A': {a^*}' = a$ Let $a = \tuple {x, y} \in A'$. ...
Algebra from Cayley-Dickson Construction is not Real Star-Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Algebra_from_Cayley-Dickson_Construction_is_not_Real_Star-Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Algebra_from_Cayley-Dickson_Construction_is_not_Real_Star-Algebra
[ "Real Star-Algebras", "Cayley-Dickson Construction" ]
[ "Definition:Star-Algebra", "Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Real Star-Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Conjugation on Algebra", "Definition:Real Star-Algebra", "Definition:Conjugation on Algebra", "Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Conjugation on Algebra", "Equality of Ordered Pairs", "Definition:Star-Algebra", "Definition:Unitary Division Algebra", "Definition:Contradi...
proofwiki-4217
Cayley-Dickson Construction from Real Star-Algebra is Commutative
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a $*$-algebra. Let $A' = \struct {A_F, \oplus'}$ be constructed from $A$ using the Cayley-Dickson construction. Then $A$ is a real star-algebra {{iff}} $A'$ is a commutative algebra.
Let the conjugation operator on $A$ be $*$. Let $\tuple {a, b}, \tuple {c, d} \in A'$. Let $A$ be a real star-algebra. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \tuple {a, b} \oplus' \tuple {c, d} | r = \tuple {a \oplus c - d \oplus b^*, a^* \oplus d + c \oplus b} | c = }} {{eqn | r = \tuple {a \oplus c - d \oplus b^*, a^...
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Star-Algebra|$*$-algebra]]. Let $A' = \struct {A_F, \oplus'}$ be constructed from $A$ using the [[Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction|Cayley-Dickson construction]]. Then $A$ is a [[Definition:Real Star-Algebra|real star-algebra]] {{iff}} $A'$ is a [[Definition:Com...
Let the [[Definition:Conjugation on Algebra|conjugation]] operator on $A$ be $*$. Let $\tuple {a, b}, \tuple {c, d} \in A'$. Let $A$ be a [[Definition:Real Star-Algebra|real star-algebra]]. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \tuple {a, b} \oplus' \tuple {c, d} | r = \tuple {a \oplus c - d \oplus b^*, a^* \oplus d + c ...
Cayley-Dickson Construction from Real Star-Algebra is Commutative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cayley-Dickson_Construction_from_Real_Star-Algebra_is_Commutative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cayley-Dickson_Construction_from_Real_Star-Algebra_is_Commutative
[ "Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Real Star-Algebras", "Commutative Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Star-Algebra", "Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Real Star-Algebra", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)" ]
[ "Definition:Conjugation on Algebra", "Definition:Real Star-Algebra", "Real Star-Algebra is Commutative", "Real Addition is Commutative", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Defin...
proofwiki-4218
Cayley-Dickson Construction from Commutative Associative Algebra is Associative
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a $*$-algebra. Let $A' = \struct {A_F, \oplus'}$ be constructed from $A$ using the Cayley-Dickson construction. Then: :$A'$ is an associative algebra {{iff}}: :$A$ is both a commutative algebra and an associative algebra.
Let the conjugation operator on $A$ be $*$. Let $\tuple {a, b}, \tuple {c, d}, \tuple {e, f} \in A'$. In order to streamline notation, let $\oplus$ and $\oplus'$ both be denoted by product notation: :$a \oplus b =: a b$ :$x \oplus' y =: x y$ The context will make it clear which is meant. Suppose $A$ is commutative and ...
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Star-Algebra|$*$-algebra]]. Let $A' = \struct {A_F, \oplus'}$ be constructed from $A$ using the [[Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction|Cayley-Dickson construction]]. Then: :$A'$ is an [[Definition:Associative Algebra|associative algebra]] {{iff}}: :$A$ is both a [[...
Let the [[Definition:Conjugation on Algebra|conjugation]] operator on $A$ be $*$. Let $\tuple {a, b}, \tuple {c, d}, \tuple {e, f} \in A'$. In order to streamline notation, let $\oplus$ and $\oplus'$ both be denoted by [[Definition:Multiplicative Notation|product notation]]: :$a \oplus b =: a b$ :$x \oplus' y =: x y...
Cayley-Dickson Construction from Commutative Associative Algebra is Associative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cayley-Dickson_Construction_from_Commutative_Associative_Algebra_is_Associative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cayley-Dickson_Construction_from_Commutative_Associative_Algebra_is_Associative
[ "Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Associative Algebras", "Commutative Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Star-Algebra", "Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Associative Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Conjugation on Algebra", "Definition:Multiplicative Notation", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Commuta...
proofwiki-4219
Nicely Normed Cayley-Dickson Construction from Associative Algebra is Alternative
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a $*$-algebra. Let $A' = \struct {A_F, \oplus'}$ be constructed from $A$ using the Cayley-Dickson construction. Then $A'$ is a nicely normed alternative algebra {{iff}} $A$ is a nicely normed associative algebra.
Let the conjugation operator on $A$ be $*$. Let $\tuple {a, b}, \tuple {c, d} \in A'$. In order to streamline notation, let $\oplus$ and $\oplus'$ both be denoted by product notation: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \oplus b | o = =: | r = a b }} {{eqn | l = x \oplus' y | o = =: | r = x y }} {{end-e...
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Star-Algebra|$*$-algebra]]. Let $A' = \struct {A_F, \oplus'}$ be constructed from $A$ using the [[Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction|Cayley-Dickson construction]]. Then $A'$ is a [[Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra|nicely normed]] [[Definition:Alternative Alg...
Let the [[Definition:Conjugation on Algebra|conjugation]] operator on $A$ be $*$. Let $\tuple {a, b}, \tuple {c, d} \in A'$. In order to streamline notation, let $\oplus$ and $\oplus'$ both be denoted by [[Definition:Multiplicative Notation|product notation]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \oplus b | o = =: ...
Nicely Normed Cayley-Dickson Construction from Associative Algebra is Alternative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Nicely_Normed_Cayley-Dickson_Construction_from_Associative_Algebra_is_Alternative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Nicely_Normed_Cayley-Dickson_Construction_from_Associative_Algebra_is_Alternative
[ "Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Associative Algebras", "Nicely Normed Star-Algebras", "Alternative Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Star-Algebra", "Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Alternative Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Associative Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Conjugation on Algebra", "Definition:Multiplicative Notation", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", ...
proofwiki-4220
Element of Universe
Let $A$ be a class, which may be either a set or a proper class. Then: :$\forall A: \paren {A \in U \iff \exists x: x = A}$ where $U$ is the universal class. That is, if $A$ is an element of $U$, then $A$ is a set.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall A | l = \leftparen {A \in U} | o = \iff | r = \rightparen {\exists x: \paren {x = A \land x \in U} } | c = Characterization of Class Membership }} {{eqn | q = \forall x | l = x \in U | o = | c = Fundamental Law of Universal Class }} {{eqn | ll=...
Let $A$ be a [[Definition:Class (Class Theory)|class]], which may be either a [[Definition:Set|set]] or a [[Definition:Proper Class|proper class]]. Then: :$\forall A: \paren {A \in U \iff \exists x: x = A}$ where $U$ is the [[Definition:Universal Class|universal class]]. That is, if $A$ is an [[Definition:Element of...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall A | l = \leftparen {A \in U} | o = \iff | r = \rightparen {\exists x: \paren {x = A \land x \in U} } | c = [[Characterization of Class Membership]] }} {{eqn | q = \forall x | l = x \in U | o = | c = [[Fundamental Law of Universal Class]] }} {{e...
Element of Universe
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Element_of_Universe
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Element_of_Universe
[ "Class Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Class (Class Theory)", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Class (Class Theory)/Proper Class", "Definition:Universal Class", "Definition:Element/Class", "Definition:Set" ]
[ "Characterization of Class Membership", "Fundamental Law of Universal Class", "Conjunction with Tautology" ]
proofwiki-4221
Unordered Pairs Exist
Let $A$ and $B$ be classes. Then: :$\forall A, B: \set {A, B} \in U$ where $U$ is the universal class.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall A, B: \exists x: \forall y | l = \leftparen {y \in x} | o = \iff | r = \rightparen {y = A \lor y = B} | c = Axiom of Pairing }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall A, B: \exists x | l = x | r = \set {y: y = A \lor y = B} | c = {{Defof|Set ...
Let $A$ and $B$ be [[Definition:Class (Class Theory)|classes]]. Then: :$\forall A, B: \set {A, B} \in U$ where $U$ is the [[Definition:Universal Class|universal class]].
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall A, B: \exists x: \forall y | l = \leftparen {y \in x} | o = \iff | r = \rightparen {y = A \lor y = B} | c = [[Axiom:Axiom of Pairing (Class Theory)|Axiom of Pairing]] }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall A, B: \exists x | l = x | r = \set {y: ...
Unordered Pairs Exist
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Unordered_Pairs_Exist
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Unordered_Pairs_Exist
[ "Class Theory", "Doubletons" ]
[ "Definition:Class (Class Theory)", "Definition:Universal Class" ]
[ "Axiom:Axiom of Pairing/Class Theory", "Element of Universe" ]
proofwiki-4222
Conjunction with Tautology
:$p \land \top \dashv \vdash p$
{{BeginTableau|p \land \top \vdash p}} {{Premise|1|p \land \top}} {{Simplification|2|1|p|1|1}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|p \vdash p \land \top}} {{Premise|1|p}} {{ExcludedMiddle|2|q \lor \neg q}} {{ExcludedMiddle|3|\top}} {{Conjunction|4|1|p \land \top|1|3}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
:$p \land \top \dashv \vdash p$
{{BeginTableau|p \land \top \vdash p}} {{Premise|1|p \land \top}} {{Simplification|2|1|p|1|1}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|p \vdash p \land \top}} {{Premise|1|p}} {{ExcludedMiddle|2|q \lor \neg q}} {{ExcludedMiddle|3|\top}} {{Conjunction|4|1|p \land \top|1|3}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
Conjunction with Tautology/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Tautology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Tautology/Proof_1
[ "Conjunction", "Tautology", "Conjunction with Tautology" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-4223
Conjunction with Tautology
:$p \land \top \dashv \vdash p$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, in each case, the truth values in the appropriate columns match for all boolean interpretations. $\begin{array}{|c|ccc||c|} \hline p & p & \land & \top & \top \\ \hline \F & \F & \F & \T & \T \\ \T & \T & \T & \T & \T \\ \hline \end{a...
:$p \land \top \dashv \vdash p$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, in each case, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] in the appropriate columns match for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. $\begin{array}{|c|ccc||c|} \hline p & p & \land & \top & \top \\ \...
Conjunction with Tautology/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Tautology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Tautology/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Conjunction", "Tautology", "Conjunction with Tautology" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-4224
Disjunction with Tautology
: $p \lor \top \dashv \vdash \top$
{{BeginTableau|p \lor \top \vdash \top}} {{Premise|1|p \lor \top}} {{Assumption|2|\top}} {{Assumption|3|p}} {{Addition|4|3|p \lor \neg p|3|1}} {{TableauLine | n = 5 | pool = 3 | f = \top | rlnk = Law of Excluded Middle/Proof Rule | rtxt = Law of Excluded Middle | dep = 4 | c = }} {{ProofByCases|6|1|\top|1|2|2|3|5}} {{E...
: $p \lor \top \dashv \vdash \top$
{{BeginTableau|p \lor \top \vdash \top}} {{Premise|1|p \lor \top}} {{Assumption|2|\top}} {{Assumption|3|p}} {{Addition|4|3|p \lor \neg p|3|1}} {{TableauLine | n = 5 | pool = 3 | f = \top | rlnk = Law of Excluded Middle/Proof Rule | rtxt = Law of Excluded Middle | dep = 4 | c = }} {{ProofByCases|6|1|\top|1|2|2|3|5}} {{E...
Disjunction with Tautology/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_with_Tautology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_with_Tautology/Proof_1
[ "Disjunction", "Tautology", "Disjunction with Tautology" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-4225
Disjunction with Tautology
: $p \lor \top \dashv \vdash \top$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, in each case, the truth values in the appropriate columns match for all boolean interpretations. $\begin{array}{|c|c||ccc|} \hline p & \top & p & \lor & \top \\ \hline F & T & F & T & T \\ T & T & T & T & T \\ \hline \end{array}$ {{qe...
: $p \lor \top \dashv \vdash \top$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, in each case, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] in the appropriate columns match for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. $\begin{array}{|c|c||ccc|} \hline p & \top & p & \lor & \top \\ \...
Disjunction with Tautology/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_with_Tautology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_with_Tautology/Proof_2
[ "Disjunction", "Tautology", "Disjunction with Tautology" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-4226
Conjunction with Contradiction
:$p \land \bot \dashv \vdash \bot$
{{BeginTableau|p \land \bot \vdash \bot}} {{Premise|1|p \land \bot}} {{Simplification|2|1|\bot|1|2}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|\bot \vdash p \land \bot}} {{Premise|1|\bot}} {{Explosion|2|1|p \land \bot|1|From a bottom, we can prove what we like}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed}}
:$p \land \bot \dashv \vdash \bot$
{{BeginTableau|p \land \bot \vdash \bot}} {{Premise|1|p \land \bot}} {{Simplification|2|1|\bot|1|2}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|\bot \vdash p \land \bot}} {{Premise|1|\bot}} {{Explosion|2|1|p \land \bot|1|From a bottom, we can prove what we like}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed}}
Conjunction with Contradiction/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Contradiction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Contradiction/Proof_1
[ "Conjunction", "Contradiction", "Conjunction with Contradiction" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-4227
Conjunction with Contradiction
:$p \land \bot \dashv \vdash \bot$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, in each case, the truth values in the appropriate columns match for all boolean interpretations. $\begin{array}{|c|ccc||c|ccc|} \hline \bot & p & \land & \bot & p \\ \hline F & F & F & F & F \\ F & T & F & F & T \\ \hline \end{array}$...
:$p \land \bot \dashv \vdash \bot$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, in each case, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] in the appropriate columns match for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. $\begin{array}{|c|ccc||c|ccc|} \hline \bot & p & \land & \bot & p ...
Conjunction with Contradiction/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Contradiction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Contradiction/Proof_2
[ "Conjunction", "Contradiction", "Conjunction with Contradiction" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-4228
Disjunction with Contradiction
:$p \lor \bot \dashv \vdash p$
{{BeginTableau|p \lor \bot \vdash p}} {{Premise|1|p \lor \bot}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{Assumption|3|\bot}} {{Explosion|4|3|p|3}} {{ProofByCases|5|1|p|1|2|2|3|4}} {{EndTableau|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|p \vdash p \lor \bot}} {{Premise|1|p}} {{Addition|2|1|p \lor \bot|1|1}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
:$p \lor \bot \dashv \vdash p$
{{BeginTableau|p \lor \bot \vdash p}} {{Premise|1|p \lor \bot}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{Assumption|3|\bot}} {{Explosion|4|3|p|3}} {{ProofByCases|5|1|p|1|2|2|3|4}} {{EndTableau|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|p \vdash p \lor \bot}} {{Premise|1|p}} {{Addition|2|1|p \lor \bot|1|1}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
Disjunction with Contradiction/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_with_Contradiction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_with_Contradiction/Proof_1
[ "Disjunction", "Contradiction", "Disjunction with Contradiction" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-4229
Disjunction with Contradiction
:$p \lor \bot \dashv \vdash p$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, in each case, the truth values in the appropriate columns match for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|c|ccc|} \hline p & p & \lor & \bot \\ \hline \F & \F & \F & \F \\ \T & \T & \T & \F \\ \hline \end{array}$</now...
:$p \lor \bot \dashv \vdash p$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, in each case, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] in the appropriate columns match for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|c|ccc|} \hline p & p & \lor & \bot \\ \h...
Disjunction with Contradiction/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_with_Contradiction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_with_Contradiction/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Disjunction", "Contradiction", "Disjunction with Contradiction" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-4230
Contradiction is Negation of Tautology
A contradiction implies and is implied by the negation of a tautology: :$\bot \dashv \vdash \neg \top$ That is, a falsehood can not be true, and a non-truth is a falsehood.
{{BeginTableau|\bot \vdash \neg \top}} {{Premise|1|\bot}} {{Assumption|2|\top}} {{Explosion|3|1|\neg \top|1|Any statement we want}} {{Contradiction|4|1|\bot|2|3}} {{Explosion|5|1|\neg \top|4}} {{EndTableau|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|\neg \top \vdash \bot}} {{Premise|1|\neg \top}} {{ExcludedMiddle|2|p \lor \neg p|From the L...
A [[Definition:Contradiction|contradiction]] implies and is implied by the [[Definition:Logical Not|negation]] of a [[Definition:Tautology|tautology]]: :$\bot \dashv \vdash \neg \top$ That is, a falsehood can not be true, and a non-truth is a falsehood.
{{BeginTableau|\bot \vdash \neg \top}} {{Premise|1|\bot}} {{Assumption|2|\top}} {{Explosion|3|1|\neg \top|1|Any statement we want}} {{Contradiction|4|1|\bot|2|3}} {{Explosion|5|1|\neg \top|4}} {{EndTableau|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|\neg \top \vdash \bot}} {{Premise|1|\neg \top}} {{ExcludedMiddle|2|p \lor \neg p|From the...
Contradiction is Negation of Tautology/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Contradiction_is_Negation_of_Tautology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Contradiction_is_Negation_of_Tautology/Proof_1
[ "Contradiction", "Tautology", "Logical Negation", "Contradiction is Negation of Tautology" ]
[ "Definition:Contradiction", "Definition:Logical Not", "Definition:Tautology" ]
[]
proofwiki-4231
Contradiction is Negation of Tautology
A contradiction implies and is implied by the negation of a tautology: :$\bot \dashv \vdash \neg \top$ That is, a falsehood can not be true, and a non-truth is a falsehood.
Let $p$ be a propositional formula. Let $v$ be any arbitrary boolean interpretation of $p$. Then $\map v p = F \iff \map v {\neg p} = T$ by the definition of the logical not. Since $v$ is arbitrary, $p$ is false in all interpretations {{iff}} $\neg p$ is true in all interpretations. Hence: :$\bot \dashv \vdash \neg \to...
A [[Definition:Contradiction|contradiction]] implies and is implied by the [[Definition:Logical Not|negation]] of a [[Definition:Tautology|tautology]]: :$\bot \dashv \vdash \neg \top$ That is, a falsehood can not be true, and a non-truth is a falsehood.
Let $p$ be a [[Definition:Propositional Formula|propositional formula]]. Let $v$ be any arbitrary [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretation]] of $p$. Then $\map v p = F \iff \map v {\neg p} = T$ by the definition of the [[Definition:Logical Not|logical not]]. Since $v$ is arbitrary, $p$ is [[Defini...
Contradiction is Negation of Tautology/Proof 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Contradiction_is_Negation_of_Tautology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Contradiction_is_Negation_of_Tautology/Proof_3
[ "Contradiction", "Tautology", "Logical Negation", "Contradiction is Negation of Tautology" ]
[ "Definition:Contradiction", "Definition:Logical Not", "Definition:Tautology" ]
[ "Definition:Language of Propositional Logic/Formal Grammar/WFF", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:Logical Not", "Definition:False", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-4232
Contradiction is Negation of Tautology
A contradiction implies and is implied by the negation of a tautology: :$\bot \dashv \vdash \neg \top$ That is, a falsehood can not be true, and a non-truth is a falsehood.
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values in the appropriate columns match. $\begin{array}{|c||cc|} \hline \top & \neg & \bot \\ \hline \T & \T & \F \\ \hline \end{array}$ {{qed}}
A [[Definition:Contradiction|contradiction]] implies and is implied by the [[Definition:Logical Not|negation]] of a [[Definition:Tautology|tautology]]: :$\bot \dashv \vdash \neg \top$ That is, a falsehood can not be true, and a non-truth is a falsehood.
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] in the appropriate columns match. $\begin{array}{|c||cc|} \hline \top & \neg & \bot \\ \hline \T & \T & \F \\ \hline \end{array}$ {{qed}}
Contradiction is Negation of Tautology/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Contradiction_is_Negation_of_Tautology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Contradiction_is_Negation_of_Tautology/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Contradiction", "Tautology", "Logical Negation", "Contradiction is Negation of Tautology" ]
[ "Definition:Contradiction", "Definition:Logical Not", "Definition:Tautology" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value" ]
proofwiki-4233
Tautology is Negation of Contradiction
A tautology implies and is implied by the negation of a contradiction: :$\top \dashv \vdash \neg \bot$ That is, a truth can not be false, and a non-falsehood must be a truth.
{{BeginTableau|\top \vdash \neg \bot}} {{Premise|1|\top}} {{Assumption|2|\bot|If a contradiction were assumed ...}} {{Explosion|3|2|\neg \top|2}} {{NonContradiction|4|1, 2|1|3}} {{Contradiction|5|1|\neg \bot|2|4}} {{EndTableau|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|\neg \bot \vdash \top}} {{Premise|1|\neg \bot}} {{Assumption|2|\neg \t...
A [[Definition:Tautology|tautology]] implies and is implied by the [[Definition:Logical Not|negation]] of a [[Definition:Contradiction|contradiction]]: :$\top \dashv \vdash \neg \bot$ That is, a truth can not be false, and a non-falsehood must be a truth.
{{BeginTableau|\top \vdash \neg \bot}} {{Premise|1|\top}} {{Assumption|2|\bot|If a contradiction were assumed ...}} {{Explosion|3|2|\neg \top|2}} {{NonContradiction|4|1, 2|1|3}} {{Contradiction|5|1|\neg \bot|2|4}} {{EndTableau|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|\neg \bot \vdash \top}} {{Premise|1|\neg \bot}} {{Assumption|2|\neg ...
Tautology is Negation of Contradiction/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tautology_is_Negation_of_Contradiction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tautology_is_Negation_of_Contradiction/Proof_1
[ "Tautology", "Logical Negation", "Contradiction", "Tautology is Negation of Contradiction" ]
[ "Definition:Tautology", "Definition:Logical Not", "Definition:Contradiction" ]
[]
proofwiki-4234
Tautology is Negation of Contradiction
A tautology implies and is implied by the negation of a contradiction: :$\top \dashv \vdash \neg \bot$ That is, a truth can not be false, and a non-falsehood must be a truth.
Let $p$ be a propositional formula. Let $v$ be an arbitrary boolean interpretation of $p$. Then: :$\map v p = T \iff \map v {\neg p} = F$ by the definition of the logical not. Since $v$ is arbitrary, $p$ is true in all interpretations {{iff}} $\neg p$ is false in all interpretations. Hence: :$\top \dashv \vdash \neg \...
A [[Definition:Tautology|tautology]] implies and is implied by the [[Definition:Logical Not|negation]] of a [[Definition:Contradiction|contradiction]]: :$\top \dashv \vdash \neg \bot$ That is, a truth can not be false, and a non-falsehood must be a truth.
Let $p$ be a [[Definition:Propositional Formula|propositional formula]]. Let $v$ be an arbitrary [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretation]] of $p$. Then: :$\map v p = T \iff \map v {\neg p} = F$ by the definition of the [[Definition:Logical Not|logical not]]. Since $v$ is arbitrary, $p$ is [[De...
Tautology is Negation of Contradiction/Proof 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tautology_is_Negation_of_Contradiction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tautology_is_Negation_of_Contradiction/Proof_3
[ "Tautology", "Logical Negation", "Contradiction", "Tautology is Negation of Contradiction" ]
[ "Definition:Tautology", "Definition:Logical Not", "Definition:Contradiction" ]
[ "Definition:Language of Propositional Logic/Formal Grammar/WFF", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:Logical Not", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:False", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-4235
Tautology is Negation of Contradiction
A tautology implies and is implied by the negation of a contradiction: :$\top \dashv \vdash \neg \bot$ That is, a truth can not be false, and a non-falsehood must be a truth.
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values in the appropriate columns match. $\begin{array}{|c||cc|} \hline \bot & \neg & \top \\ \hline \F & \F & \T \\ \hline \end{array}$ {{qed}}
A [[Definition:Tautology|tautology]] implies and is implied by the [[Definition:Logical Not|negation]] of a [[Definition:Contradiction|contradiction]]: :$\top \dashv \vdash \neg \bot$ That is, a truth can not be false, and a non-falsehood must be a truth.
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] in the appropriate columns match. $\begin{array}{|c||cc|} \hline \bot & \neg & \top \\ \hline \F & \F & \T \\ \hline \end{array}$ {{qed}}
Tautology is Negation of Contradiction/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tautology_is_Negation_of_Contradiction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tautology_is_Negation_of_Contradiction/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Tautology", "Logical Negation", "Contradiction", "Tautology is Negation of Contradiction" ]
[ "Definition:Tautology", "Definition:Logical Not", "Definition:Contradiction" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value" ]
proofwiki-4236
Cayley-Dickson Construction from Nicely Normed Algebra is Nicely Normed
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a $*$-algebra. Let $A' = \struct {A_F, \oplus'}$ be constructed from $A$ using the Cayley-Dickson construction. Then $A'$ is a nicely normed algebra {{iff}} $A$ is also a nicely normed algebra.
Let the conjugation operator on $A$ be $*$. Let $\tuple {a, b}, \tuple {c, d} \in A'$. In order to streamline notation, let $\oplus$ and $\oplus'$ both be denoted by product notation: :$a \oplus b =: a b$ :$x \oplus' y =: x y$ The context will make it clear which is meant. Let $A$ be a nicely normed algebra. Then: {{be...
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Star-Algebra|$*$-algebra]]. Let $A' = \struct {A_F, \oplus'}$ be constructed from $A$ using the [[Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction|Cayley-Dickson construction]]. Then $A'$ is a [[Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra|nicely normed algebra]] {{iff}} $A$ is also ...
Let the [[Definition:Conjugation on Algebra|conjugation]] operator on $A$ be $*$. Let $\tuple {a, b}, \tuple {c, d} \in A'$. In order to streamline notation, let $\oplus$ and $\oplus'$ both be denoted by [[Definition:Multiplicative Notation|product notation]]: :$a \oplus b =: a b$ :$x \oplus' y =: x y$ The context ...
Cayley-Dickson Construction from Nicely Normed Algebra is Nicely Normed
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cayley-Dickson_Construction_from_Nicely_Normed_Algebra_is_Nicely_Normed
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cayley-Dickson_Construction_from_Nicely_Normed_Algebra_is_Nicely_Normed
[ "Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Nicely Normed Star-Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Star-Algebra", "Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Conjugation on Algebra", "Definition:Multiplicative Notation", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Real Element in Star-Algebra", "Definition:Real Element in Star-Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Definition:Norm/V...
proofwiki-4237
Quaternions form Algebra
The set of quaternions $\Bbb H$ forms an algebra over the field of real numbers. This algebra is: :$(1): \quad$ An associative algebra, but '''not''' a commutative algebra. :$(2): \quad$ A normed division algebra. :$(3): \quad$ A nicely normed $*$-algebra.
The quaternions $\Bbb H$ are formed by the Cayley-Dickson Construction from the complex numbers $\C$. From Complex Numbers form Algebra, we have that $\C$ forms: :$(1): \quad$ An associative algebra :$(2): \quad$ A commutative algebra :$(3): \quad$ A normed division algebra :$(4): \quad$ A nicely normed $*$-algebra. Fr...
The [[Definition:Quaternion|set of quaternions]] $\Bbb H$ forms an [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra]] over the [[Definition:Field of Real Numbers|field of real numbers]]. This [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra]] is: :$(1): \quad$ An [[Definition:Associative Algebra|associative algebra]], but '''not''' a [...
The [[Definition:Quaternion|quaternions]] $\Bbb H$ are formed by the [[Definition:Quaternion/Construction from Cayley-Dickson Construction|Cayley-Dickson Construction]] from the [[Definition:Complex Number|complex numbers]] $\C$. From [[Complex Numbers form Algebra]], we have that $\C$ forms: :$(1): \quad$ An [[Defini...
Quaternions form Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Quaternions_form_Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Quaternions_form_Algebra
[ "Quaternions", "Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Quaternion", "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Field of Real Numbers", "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Quaternion", "Definition:Quaternion/Construction from Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Complex Number", "Complex Numbers form Algebra", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Commutative Algebra (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Nicely N...
proofwiki-4238
Octonions form Algebra
The set of octonions $\Bbb O$ forms an algebra over the field of real numbers. This algebra is: :$(1): \quad$ An alternative algebra, but '''not''' an associative algebra. :$(2): \quad$ A normed division algebra. :$(3): \quad$ A nicely normed $*$-algebra.
The octonions $\Bbb O$ are formed by the Cayley-Dickson construction from the quaternions $\Bbb H$. From Quaternions form Algebra, we have that $\Bbb H$ forms: :$(1): \quad$ An associative algebra :$(2): \quad$ A normed division algebra :$(3): \quad$ A nicely normed $*$-algebra. From Cayley-Dickson Construction forms S...
The [[Definition:Octonion|set of octonions]] $\Bbb O$ forms an [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra]] over the [[Definition:Field of Real Numbers|field of real numbers]]. This [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra]] is: :$(1): \quad$ An [[Definition:Alternative Algebra|alternative algebra]], but '''not''' an [[De...
The [[Definition:Octonion|octonions]] $\Bbb O$ are formed by the [[Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction|Cayley-Dickson construction]] from the [[Definition:Quaternion|quaternions]] $\Bbb H$. From [[Quaternions form Algebra]], we have that $\Bbb H$ forms: :$(1): \quad$ An [[Definition:Associative Algebra|associative ...
Octonions form Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Octonions_form_Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Octonions_form_Algebra
[ "Octonions", "Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Octonion", "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Field of Real Numbers", "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Alternative Algebra", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Octonion", "Definition:Cayley-Dickson Construction", "Definition:Quaternion", "Quaternions form Algebra", "Definition:Associative Algebra", "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Nicely Normed Star-Algebra", "Cayley-Dickson Construction forms Star-Algebra", "Definition:Star-Al...
proofwiki-4239
Division Algebra has No Zero Divisors
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be an algebra over a field $F$. Then $A$ is a division algebra {{iff}} it has no zero divisors. That is: :$\forall a, b \in A_F: a \oplus b = \mathbf 0_A \implies a = \mathbf 0_A \lor b = \mathbf 0_A$ If the product of two elements of $A$ is zero, then at least one of those elements must...
Let $A$ be a division algebra, in the sense that: :$\forall a, b \in A_F, b \ne \mathbf 0_A: \exists_1 x \in A_F, y \in A_F: a = b \oplus x, a = y \oplus b$ Suppose that: :$\exists a, b \in A_F \setminus \set {\mathbf 0_A}: \mathbf 0_A = b \oplus a$ Then by definition of the zero vector we also have that $\mathbf 0_A =...
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be an [[Definition:Algebra over Field|algebra over a field]] $F$. Then $A$ is a [[Definition:Division Algebra|division algebra]] {{iff}} it has no [[Definition:Zero Divisor of Algebra|zero divisors]]. That is: :$\forall a, b \in A_F: a \oplus b = \mathbf 0_A \implies a = \mathbf 0_A ...
Let $A$ be a [[Definition:Division Algebra|division algebra]], in the sense that: :$\forall a, b \in A_F, b \ne \mathbf 0_A: \exists_1 x \in A_F, y \in A_F: a = b \oplus x, a = y \oplus b$ Suppose that: :$\exists a, b \in A_F \setminus \set {\mathbf 0_A}: \mathbf 0_A = b \oplus a$ Then by definition of the [[Definiti...
Division Algebra has No Zero Divisors
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Division_Algebra_has_No_Zero_Divisors
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Division_Algebra_has_No_Zero_Divisors
[ "Division Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Algebra over Field", "Definition:Division Algebra", "Definition:Zero Divisor/Algebra", "Definition:Division Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Division Algebra", "Definition:Zero Vector", "Definition:Zero Vector", "Definition:Division Algebra", "Definition:Bilinear Mapping", "Category:Division Algebras" ]
proofwiki-4240
Normed Division Algebra is Unitary Division Algebra
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a normed divison algebra over a field $F$. Let the unit of $A$ be $1_A$, and the zero of $A$ be $0_A$. Then $A$ is a unitary division algebra. Also: :$\norm {1_A} = 1$ where $\norm {1_A}$ denotes the norm of $1_A$.
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a normed divison algebra as defined {{hypothesis}}. The fact that $A$ is a unitary algebra is a consequence of the definition of normed divison algebra. From the definition of a norm, we have that: :$\forall a \in A: \norm a = 0 \iff a = 0_A$ So, let $a, b \in A \setminus \set {0_A}$....
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Normed Division Algebra|normed divison algebra]] over a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] $F$. Let the [[Definition:Unit of Algebra|unit]] of $A$ be $1_A$, and the [[Definition:Zero Vector|zero]] of $A$ be $0_A$. Then $A$ is a [[Definition:Unitary Divisio...
Let $A = \struct {A_F, \oplus}$ be a [[Definition:Normed Division Algebra|normed divison algebra]] as defined {{hypothesis}}. The fact that $A$ is a [[Definition:Unitary Algebra|unitary algebra]] is a consequence of the definition of [[Definition:Normed Division Algebra|normed divison algebra]]. From the definition ...
Normed Division Algebra is Unitary Division Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Normed_Division_Algebra_is_Unitary_Division_Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Normed_Division_Algebra_is_Unitary_Division_Algebra
[ "Normed Division Algebras", "Unitary Division Algebras" ]
[ "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Unit of Algebra", "Definition:Zero Vector", "Definition:Unitary Division Algebra", "Definition:Norm/Vector Space" ]
[ "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Unital Algebra", "Definition:Normed Division Algebra", "Definition:Norm/Vector Space", "Definition:Division Algebra" ]
proofwiki-4241
Zermelo's Theorem (Set Theory)
Every set of cardinals is well-ordered with respect to $\le$.
Let $S_1$ and $S_2$ be sets which are not empty. Suppose there exists an injection $f: S_1 \to S_2$ and another injection $g: S_2 \to S_1$. Then by the Cantor-Bernstein-Schröder Theorem there exists a bijection between $S_1$ and $S_2$ and by definition $S_1$ is equivalent to $S_2$. Let $\AA$ be the set of invertible ma...
Every set of [[Definition:Cardinal|cardinals]] is [[Definition:Well-Ordered Set|well-ordered]] with respect to $\le$.
Let $S_1$ and $S_2$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]] which are not [[Definition:Empty Set|empty]]. Suppose there exists an [[Definition:Injection|injection]] $f: S_1 \to S_2$ and another [[Definition:Injection|injection]] $g: S_2 \to S_1$. Then by the [[Cantor-Bernstein-Schröder Theorem]] there exists a [[Definition:Biject...
Zermelo's Theorem (Set Theory)
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Zermelo's_Theorem_(Set_Theory)
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Zermelo's_Theorem_(Set_Theory)
[ "Set Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Cardinal", "Definition:Well-Ordered Set" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Empty Set", "Definition:Injection", "Definition:Injection", "Cantor-Bernstein-Schröder Theorem", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Set Equivalence", "Definition:Inverse Mapping", "Definition:Empty Set", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Inverse Mapping", "Defini...
proofwiki-4242
Cardinals form Equivalence Classes
Let $\map \Card S$ denote the cardinal of the set $S$. Then $\map \Card S$ induces an equivalence class which contains all sets which have the same cardinality as $S$.
Follows directly from: :The definition of a cardinal as $S \sim T \iff \map \Card S = \map \Card T$ :Set Equivalence behaves like Equivalence Relation :Relation Partitions Set iff Equivalence. {{qed}} Category:Cardinals j21akpr62mrktbv4ttfsy07xrfrqfrt
Let $\map \Card S$ denote the [[Definition:Cardinal|cardinal]] of the set $S$. Then $\map \Card S$ induces an [[Definition:Equivalence Class|equivalence class]] which contains all [[Definition:Set|sets]] which have the same [[Definition:Cardinality|cardinality]] as $S$.
Follows directly from: :The definition of a [[Definition:Cardinal|cardinal]] as $S \sim T \iff \map \Card S = \map \Card T$ :[[Set Equivalence behaves like Equivalence Relation]] :[[Relation Partitions Set iff Equivalence]]. {{qed}} [[Category:Cardinals]] j21akpr62mrktbv4ttfsy07xrfrqfrt
Cardinals form Equivalence Classes
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinals_form_Equivalence_Classes
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinals_form_Equivalence_Classes
[ "Cardinals" ]
[ "Definition:Cardinal", "Definition:Equivalence Class", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cardinality" ]
[ "Definition:Cardinal", "Set Equivalence behaves like Equivalence Relation", "Relation Partitions Set iff Equivalence", "Category:Cardinals" ]
proofwiki-4243
Integers form Commutative Ring with Unity
The integers $\struct {\Z, +, \times}$ form a commutative ring with unity under addition and multiplication.
We have that: :$\struct {\Z, +, \times}$ form a commutative ring. :$\struct {\Z, +, \times}$ has a unity, and the unity is $1$. {{Qed}}
The [[Definition:Integer|integers]] $\struct {\Z, +, \times}$ form a [[Definition:Commutative and Unitary Ring|commutative ring with unity]] under [[Definition:Integer Addition|addition]] and [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|multiplication]].
We have that: :[[Integers form Commutative Ring|$\struct {\Z, +, \times}$ form a commutative ring]]. :$\struct {\Z, +, \times}$ has a [[Definition:Unity of Ring|unity]], and the [[Integer Multiplication Identity is One|unity is $1$]]. {{Qed}}
Integers form Commutative Ring with Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integers_form_Commutative_Ring_with_Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integers_form_Commutative_Ring_with_Unity
[ "Integers", "Commutative Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Commutative and Unitary Ring", "Definition:Addition/Integers", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers" ]
[ "Integers form Commutative Ring", "Definition:Unity (Abstract Algebra)/Ring", "Integer Multiplication Identity is One" ]
proofwiki-4244
Ring of Square Matrices over Ring is Ring
Let $R$ be a ring. Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a (strictly) positive integer. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +, \times}$ denote the ring of square matrices of order $n$ over $R$. Then $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +, \times}$ is a ring.
From Matrix Entrywise Addition forms Abelian Group we have that $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +}$ is an abelian group, because $\struct {R, +}$ is itself an abelian group. Similarly, it is clear that $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, \times}$ is a semigroup, as Matrix Multiplication over Order n Square Matrices is Closed and Matri...
Let $R$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a [[Definition:Strictly Positive Integer|(strictly) positive integer]]. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +, \times}$ denote the [[Definition:Ring of Square Matrices|ring of square matrices of order $n$ over $R$.]] Then $\struct {\map {\MM...
From [[Matrix Entrywise Addition forms Abelian Group]] we have that $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +}$ is an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian group]], because $\struct {R, +}$ is itself an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian group]]. Similarly, it is clear that $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Semigrou...
Ring of Square Matrices over Ring is Ring
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_of_Square_Matrices_over_Ring_is_Ring
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_of_Square_Matrices_over_Ring_is_Ring
[ "Rings of Square Matrices" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer", "Definition:Ring of Square Matrices", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)" ]
[ "Matrix Entrywise Addition forms Abelian Group", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Definition:Semigroup", "Matrix Multiplication over Order n Square Matrices is Closed", "Matrix Multiplication is Associative", "Matrix Multiplication Distributes over Matrix Addition" ]
proofwiki-4245
Ring of Square Matrices over Ring with Unity
Let $R$ be a ring with unity. Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a (strictly) positive integer. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +, \times}$ denote the ring of square matrices of order $n$ over $R$. Then $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +, \times}$ is a ring with unity.
From Ring of Square Matrices over Ring is Ring we have that $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +, \times}$ is a ring. As $R$ has a unity, the unit matrix can be formed. The unity of $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +, \times}$ is this unit matrix. {{qed}}
Let $R$ be a [[Definition:Ring with Unity|ring with unity]]. Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a [[Definition:Strictly Positive Integer|(strictly) positive integer]]. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +, \times}$ denote the [[Definition:Ring of Square Matrices|ring of square matrices of order $n$ over $R$.]] Then $\struct {\map {...
From [[Ring of Square Matrices over Ring is Ring]] we have that $\struct {\map {\MM_R} n, +, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. As $R$ has a [[Definition:Unity of Ring|unity]], the [[Definition:Unit Matrix|unit matrix]] can be formed. The [[Definition:Unity of Ring|unity]] of $\struct {\map {\...
Ring of Square Matrices over Ring with Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_of_Square_Matrices_over_Ring_with_Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_of_Square_Matrices_over_Ring_with_Unity
[ "Rings of Square Matrices", "Rings with Unity" ]
[ "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer", "Definition:Ring of Square Matrices", "Definition:Ring with Unity" ]
[ "Ring of Square Matrices over Ring is Ring", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Unity (Abstract Algebra)/Ring", "Definition:Unit Matrix", "Definition:Unity (Abstract Algebra)/Ring", "Definition:Unit Matrix" ]
proofwiki-4246
Ring of Square Matrices over Field is Ring with Unity
Let $F$ be a field. Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a (strictly) positive integer. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_F} n, +, \times}$ denote the ring of square matrices of order $n$ over $F$. Then $\struct {\map {\MM_F} n, +, \times}$ is a ring with unity, but is not a commutative ring.
We have by definition that a field is a division ring which is also commutative. Hence $F$ is a commutative ring with unity. So, from Ring of Square Matrices over Commutative Ring with Unity we have that $\struct {\map {\MM_F} n, +, \times}$ is a ring with unity. From Matrix Multiplication is not Commutative, we have t...
Let $F$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]]. Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a [[Definition:Strictly Positive Integer|(strictly) positive integer]]. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_F} n, +, \times}$ denote the [[Definition:Ring of Square Matrices|ring of square matrices of order $n$ over $F$]]. Then $\struct {\map {\...
We have by definition that a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] is a [[Definition:Division Ring|division ring]] which is also [[Definition:Commutative Ring|commutative]]. Hence $F$ is a [[Definition:Commutative and Unitary Ring|commutative ring with unity]]. So, from [[Ring of Square Matrices over Commutat...
Ring of Square Matrices over Field is Ring with Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_of_Square_Matrices_over_Field_is_Ring_with_Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_of_Square_Matrices_over_Field_is_Ring_with_Unity
[ "Matrix Algebra", "Examples of Rings with Unity" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer", "Definition:Ring of Square Matrices", "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Commutative Ring" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Division Ring", "Definition:Commutative Ring", "Definition:Commutative and Unitary Ring", "Ring of Square Matrices over Commutative Ring with Unity", "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Matrix Multiplication is not Commutative", "Definition:Commutative Rin...
proofwiki-4247
Ring of Square Matrices over Real Numbers
Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a (strictly) positive integer. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_\R} n, +, \times}$ denote the ring of square matrices of order $n$ over $\R$. Then $\struct {\map {\MM_\R} n, +, \times}$ is a ring with unity, but is not a commutative ring.
Recall that Real Numbers form Field. The result follows directly from Ring of Square Matrices over Field is Ring with Unity. {{qed}}
Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a [[Definition:Strictly Positive Integer|(strictly) positive integer]]. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_\R} n, +, \times}$ denote the [[Definition:Ring of Square Matrices|ring of square matrices of order $n$ over $\R$]]. Then $\struct {\map {\MM_\R} n, +, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Ring with Unity|rin...
Recall that [[Real Numbers form Field]]. The result follows directly from [[Ring of Square Matrices over Field is Ring with Unity]]. {{qed}}
Ring of Square Matrices over Real Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_of_Square_Matrices_over_Real_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_of_Square_Matrices_over_Real_Numbers
[ "Matrix Algebra", "Rings with Unity", "Ring of Square Matrices over Real Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer", "Definition:Ring of Square Matrices", "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Commutative Ring" ]
[ "Real Numbers form Field", "Ring of Square Matrices over Field is Ring with Unity" ]
proofwiki-4248
Matrix Multiplication is not Commutative/Order 2 Square Matrices
Let $R$ be a ring with unity whose zero is $0_R$ and whose unity is $1_R$. Let $\map {\MM_R} 2$ denote the $2 \times 2$ matrix space over $R$. The operation of (conventional) matrix multiplication is not commutative over $\map {\MM_R} 2$.
As $R$ is a ring with unity, we have that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = 0_R | o = \ne | r = 1_R }} {{eqn | l = 0_R \times 0_R | r = 0_R | c = }} {{eqn | l = 0_R \times 1_R | r = 0_R = 1_R \times 0_R | c = }} {{eqn | l = 1_R \times 1_R | r = 1_R | c = }} {{end-eqn}} Now le...
Let $R$ be a [[Definition:Ring with Unity|ring with unity]] whose [[Definition:Ring Zero|zero]] is $0_R$ and whose [[Definition:Unity of Ring|unity]] is $1_R$. Let $\map {\MM_R} 2$ denote the [[Definition:Matrix Space|$2 \times 2$ matrix space]] over $R$. The operation of [[Definition:Matrix Product (Conventional)|(c...
As $R$ is a [[Definition:Ring with Unity|ring with unity]], we have that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = 0_R | o = \ne | r = 1_R }} {{eqn | l = 0_R \times 0_R | r = 0_R | c = }} {{eqn | l = 0_R \times 1_R | r = 0_R = 1_R \times 0_R | c = }} {{eqn | l = 1_R \times 1_R | r = 1_R ...
Matrix Multiplication is not Commutative/Order 2 Square Matrices
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Matrix_Multiplication_is_not_Commutative/Order_2_Square_Matrices
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Matrix_Multiplication_is_not_Commutative/Order_2_Square_Matrices
[ "Matrix Multiplication is not Commutative" ]
[ "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Unity (Abstract Algebra)/Ring", "Definition:Matrix Space", "Definition:Matrix Product (Conventional)", "Definition:Commutative/Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Commutative/Elements", "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Matrix Product (Conventional)", "Definition:Commutative/Operation" ]
proofwiki-4249
Ring Zero is Unique
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a ring. Then the ring zero of $R$ is unique.
The ring zero is, by definition of a ring, the identity element of the additive group $\struct {R, +}$. The result then follows from Identity of Group is Unique. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Then the [[Definition:Ring Zero|ring zero]] of $R$ is unique.
The [[Definition:Ring Zero|ring zero]] is, by definition of a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]], the [[Definition:Identity Element|identity element]] of the [[Definition:Additive Group of Ring|additive group]] $\struct {R, +}$. The result then follows from [[Identity of Group is Unique]]. {{qed}}
Ring Zero is Unique/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Zero_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Zero_is_Unique/Proof_1
[ "Ring Theory", "Ring Zero is Unique" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Zero" ]
[ "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Additive Group of Ring", "Identity of Group is Unique" ]
proofwiki-4250
Ring Zero is Unique
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a ring. Then the ring zero of $R$ is unique.
From Ring Product with Zero we have that the ring zero of $R$ is indeed a zero element, as suggested by its name. The result then follows from Zero Element is Unique. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Then the [[Definition:Ring Zero|ring zero]] of $R$ is unique.
From [[Ring Product with Zero]] we have that the [[Definition:Ring Zero|ring zero]] of $R$ is indeed a [[Definition:Zero Element|zero element]], as suggested by its name. The result then follows from [[Zero Element is Unique]]. {{qed}}
Ring Zero is Unique/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Zero_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Zero_is_Unique/Proof_2
[ "Ring Theory", "Ring Zero is Unique" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Zero" ]
[ "Ring Product with Zero", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Zero Element", "Zero Element is Unique" ]
proofwiki-4251
Ring Zero is Unique
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a ring. Then the ring zero of $R$ is unique.
Suppose $0$ and $0'$ are both ring zeroes of $\struct {R, +, \circ}$. Then by Ring Product with Zero: :$0' \circ 0 = 0$ by dint of $0$ being a ring zero :$0' \circ 0 = 0'$ by dint of $0'$ being a ring zero. So $0 = 0' \circ 0 = 0'$. So $0 = 0'$ and there is only one ring zero of $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ after all. {{qed...
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Then the [[Definition:Ring Zero|ring zero]] of $R$ is unique.
Suppose $0$ and $0'$ are both [[Definition:Ring Zero|ring zeroes]] of $\struct {R, +, \circ}$. Then by [[Ring Product with Zero]]: :$0' \circ 0 = 0$ by dint of $0$ being a [[Definition:Ring Zero|ring zero]] :$0' \circ 0 = 0'$ by dint of $0'$ being a [[Definition:Ring Zero|ring zero]]. So $0 = 0' \circ 0 = 0'$. So $0...
Ring Zero is Unique/Proof 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Zero_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Zero_is_Unique/Proof_3
[ "Ring Theory", "Ring Zero is Unique" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Zero" ]
[ "Definition:Ring Zero", "Ring Product with Zero", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Ring Zero" ]
proofwiki-4252
Ring Negative is Unique
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a ring. Let $a \in R$. Then the ring negative $-a$ of $a$ is unique.
The ring negative is, by definition of a ring, the inverse element of $a$ in the additive group $\struct {R, +}$. The result then follows from Inverse in Group is Unique. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Let $a \in R$. Then the [[Definition:Ring Negative|ring negative]] $-a$ of $a$ is unique.
The [[Definition:Ring Negative|ring negative]] is, by definition of a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]], the [[Definition:Inverse Element|inverse element]] of $a$ in the [[Definition:Additive Group of Ring|additive group]] $\struct {R, +}$. The result then follows from [[Inverse in Group is Unique]]. {{qed}}
Ring Negative is Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Negative_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Negative_is_Unique
[ "Ring Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Negative" ]
[ "Definition:Ring Negative", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Inverse (Abstract Algebra)/Inverse", "Definition:Additive Group of Ring", "Inverse in Group is Unique" ]
proofwiki-4253
Negative of Ring Negative
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a ring. Let $a \in R$ and let $-a$ be the ring negative of $a$. Then: :$-\paren {-a} = a$
The ring negative is, by definition of a ring, the inverse element of $a$ in the additive group $\struct {R, +}$. The result then follows from Inverse of Group Inverse. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Let $a \in R$ and let $-a$ be the [[Definition:Ring Negative|ring negative]] of $a$. Then: :$-\paren {-a} = a$
The [[Definition:Ring Negative|ring negative]] is, by definition of a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]], the [[Definition:Inverse Element|inverse element]] of $a$ in the [[Definition:Additive Group of Ring|additive group]] $\struct {R, +}$. The result then follows from [[Inverse of Group Inverse]]. {{qed}}
Negative of Ring Negative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Negative_of_Ring_Negative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Negative_of_Ring_Negative
[ "Ring Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Negative" ]
[ "Definition:Ring Negative", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Inverse (Abstract Algebra)/Inverse", "Definition:Additive Group of Ring", "Inverse of Group Inverse" ]
proofwiki-4254
Even Perfect Number is Triangular
All perfect numbers which are even are triangular.
Follows from: : Even Perfect Number is Hexagonal : Hexagonal Number is Triangular Number {{qed}}
All [[Definition:Perfect Number|perfect numbers]] which are [[Definition:Even Integer|even]] are [[Definition:Triangular Number|triangular]].
Follows from: : [[Even Perfect Number is Hexagonal]] : [[Hexagonal Number is Triangular Number]] {{qed}}
Even Perfect Number is Triangular/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Even_Perfect_Number_is_Triangular
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Even_Perfect_Number_is_Triangular/Proof_2
[ "Even Perfect Number is Triangular", "Euclidean Numbers", "Triangular Numbers", "Perfect Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Perfect Number", "Definition:Even Integer", "Definition:Triangular Number" ]
[ "Even Perfect Number is Hexagonal", "Hexagonal Number is Triangular Number" ]
proofwiki-4255
Field has no Proper Zero Divisors
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a field whose zero is $0_F$ and whose unity is $1_F$. Then $\struct {F, +, \times}$ has no proper zero divisors. That is: :$a \times b = 0_F \implies a = 0_F \lor b = 0_F$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | o = \ne | r = 0_F | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a^{-1} \times \paren {a \times b} | r = a^{-1} \times 0_F | c = $a^{-1}$ exists because $a \ne 0_F$ }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \paren {a^{-1} \times a} \times b | r = a^{-1} \times 0_F...
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] whose [[Definition:Field Zero|zero]] is $0_F$ and whose [[Definition:Unity of Field|unity]] is $1_F$. Then $\struct {F, +, \times}$ has no [[Definition:Proper Zero Divisor|proper zero divisors]]. That is: :$a \times b = 0_F \implies a = 0...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | o = \ne | r = 0_F | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a^{-1} \times \paren {a \times b} | r = a^{-1} \times 0_F | c = $a^{-1}$ exists because $a \ne 0_F$ }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \paren {a^{-1} \times a} \times b | r = a^{-1} \times 0_F...
Field has no Proper Zero Divisors/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_has_no_Proper_Zero_Divisors
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_has_no_Proper_Zero_Divisors/Proof_2
[ "Field Theory", "Field has no Proper Zero Divisors" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field Zero", "Definition:Multiplicative Identity", "Definition:Proper Zero Divisor" ]
[ "Field Product with Zero" ]
proofwiki-4256
Multiplicative Identity is Unique
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a field. Then the multiplicative identity $1_F$ of $F$ is unique.
From the definition of multiplicative identity, $1_F$ is the identity element of the multiplicative group $\struct {F^*, \times}$. The result follows from Identity of Group is Unique. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]]. Then the [[Definition:Multiplicative Identity|multiplicative identity]] $1_F$ of $F$ is unique.
From the definition of [[Definition:Multiplicative Identity|multiplicative identity]], $1_F$ is the [[Definition:Identity Element|identity element]] of the [[Definition:Multiplicative Group|multiplicative group]] $\struct {F^*, \times}$. The result follows from [[Identity of Group is Unique]]. {{qed}}
Multiplicative Identity is Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplicative_Identity_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplicative_Identity_is_Unique
[ "Field Theory", "Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Multiplicative Identity" ]
[ "Definition:Multiplicative Identity", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Multiplicative Group", "Identity of Group is Unique" ]
proofwiki-4257
Multiplicative Inverse in Field is Unique
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a field whose zero is $0_F$. Let $a \in F$ such that $a \ne 0_F$. Then the multiplicative inverse $a^{-1}$ of $a$ is unique.
From the definition of multiplicative inverse, $a^{-1}$ is the inverse element of the multiplicative group $\struct {F^*, \times}$. The result follows from Inverse in Group is Unique. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] whose [[Definition:Field Zero|zero]] is $0_F$. Let $a \in F$ such that $a \ne 0_F$. Then the [[Definition:Multiplicative Inverse in Field|multiplicative inverse]] $a^{-1}$ of $a$ is [[Definition:Unique|unique]].
From the definition of [[Definition:Multiplicative Inverse in Field|multiplicative inverse]], $a^{-1}$ is the [[Definition:Inverse Element|inverse element]] of the [[Definition:Multiplicative Group|multiplicative group]] $\struct {F^*, \times}$. The result follows from [[Inverse in Group is Unique]]. {{qed}}
Multiplicative Inverse in Field is Unique/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplicative_Inverse_in_Field_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplicative_Inverse_in_Field_is_Unique/Proof_1
[ "Field Theory", "Multiplicative Inverse in Field is Unique" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field Zero", "Definition:Multiplicative Inverse/Field", "Definition:Unique" ]
[ "Definition:Multiplicative Inverse/Field", "Definition:Inverse (Abstract Algebra)/Inverse", "Definition:Multiplicative Group", "Inverse in Group is Unique" ]
proofwiki-4258
Multiplicative Inverse in Field is Unique
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a field whose zero is $0_F$. Let $a \in F$ such that $a \ne 0_F$. Then the multiplicative inverse $a^{-1}$ of $a$ is unique.
From the definition of a field as a division ring, every element of $F^*$ is a unit. The result follows from Product Inverse in Ring is Unique. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] whose [[Definition:Field Zero|zero]] is $0_F$. Let $a \in F$ such that $a \ne 0_F$. Then the [[Definition:Multiplicative Inverse in Field|multiplicative inverse]] $a^{-1}$ of $a$ is [[Definition:Unique|unique]].
From the definition of a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] as a [[Definition:Division Ring|division ring]], every element of $F^*$ is a [[Definition:Unit of Ring|unit]]. The result follows from [[Product Inverse in Ring is Unique]]. {{qed}}
Multiplicative Inverse in Field is Unique/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplicative_Inverse_in_Field_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplicative_Inverse_in_Field_is_Unique/Proof_2
[ "Field Theory", "Multiplicative Inverse in Field is Unique" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field Zero", "Definition:Multiplicative Inverse/Field", "Definition:Unique" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Division Ring", "Definition:Unit of Ring", "Product Inverse in Ring is Unique" ]
proofwiki-4259
Inverse of Multiplicative Inverse
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a field whose zero is $0_F$. Let $a \in F$ such that $a \ne 0_F$. Let $a^{-1}$ be the multiplicative inverse of $a$. Then $\paren {a^{-1} }^{-1} = a$.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \paren {a^{-1} } \times a | r = a \times \paren {a^{-1} } | c = {{Field-axiom|M2}} }} {{eqn | r = 1_F | c = {{Field-axiom|M4}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a | r = \paren {a^{-1} }^{-1} | c = {{Defof|Multiplicative Inverse in Field}} }} {{end-eqn}} {{qed}}
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] whose [[Definition:Field Zero|zero]] is $0_F$. Let $a \in F$ such that $a \ne 0_F$. Let $a^{-1}$ be the [[Definition:Multiplicative Inverse in Field|multiplicative inverse]] of $a$. Then $\paren {a^{-1} }^{-1} = a$.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \paren {a^{-1} } \times a | r = a \times \paren {a^{-1} } | c = {{Field-axiom|M2}} }} {{eqn | r = 1_F | c = {{Field-axiom|M4}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a | r = \paren {a^{-1} }^{-1} | c = {{Defof|Multiplicative Inverse in Field}} }} {{end-eqn}} {{qed}}
Inverse of Multiplicative Inverse/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inverse_of_Multiplicative_Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inverse_of_Multiplicative_Inverse/Proof_2
[ "Field Theory", "Inverse of Multiplicative Inverse" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field Zero", "Definition:Multiplicative Inverse/Field" ]
[]
proofwiki-4260
Integral Multiple Distributes over Ring Addition
Let $\struct {R, +, \times}$ be a ring, or a field. Let $a, b \in R$ and $m, n \in \Z$. Then: :$(1): \quad \paren {m + n} \cdot a = \paren {m \cdot a} + \paren {n \cdot a}$ :$(2): \quad m \cdot \paren {a + b} = \paren {m \cdot a} + \paren {m \cdot b}$ where $m \cdot a$ is as defined in integral multiple.
We have that the additive group $\struct {R, +}$ is an abelian group. $(1): \quad \paren {m + n} \cdot a = \paren {m \cdot a} + \paren {n \cdot a}$: This is an instance of Powers of Group Elements: Sum of Indices when expressed in additive notation: :$\forall n, m \in \Z: \forall a \in R: m a + n a = \paren {m + n} a$ ...
Let $\struct {R, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]], or a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]]. Let $a, b \in R$ and $m, n \in \Z$. Then: :$(1): \quad \paren {m + n} \cdot a = \paren {m \cdot a} + \paren {n \cdot a}$ :$(2): \quad m \cdot \paren {a + b} = \paren {m \cdot a} + \paren...
We have that the [[Definition:Additive Group of Ring|additive group]] $\struct {R, +}$ is an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian group]]. $(1): \quad \paren {m + n} \cdot a = \paren {m \cdot a} + \paren {n \cdot a}$: This is an instance of [[Powers of Group Elements/Sum of Indices|Powers of Group Elements: Sum of Ind...
Integral Multiple Distributes over Ring Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integral_Multiple_Distributes_over_Ring_Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integral_Multiple_Distributes_over_Ring_Addition
[ "Ring Theory", "Field Theory", "Examples of Distributive Operations" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Integral Multiple" ]
[ "Definition:Additive Group of Ring", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Powers of Group Elements/Sum of Indices", "Definition:Additive Notation", "Power of Product in Abelian Group", "Definition:Additive Notation" ]
proofwiki-4261
Integral Multiple of Integral Multiple
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a field. Let $a \in F$ and $m, n \in \Z$. Then: :$\paren {m n} \cdot a = m \cdot \paren {n \cdot a}$ where $n \cdot a$ is as defined in integral multiple.
We have that $\struct {F^*, \times}$ is the multiplicative group of $\struct {F, +, \times}$. Let $a \in F^*$, that is, $a \in F: a \ne 0_F$, where $0_F$ is the zero of $F$. This is an instance of Powers of Group Elements when expressed in additive notation: :$\forall m, n \in \Z: \paren {m n} a = m \paren {n a}$ {{qed...
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]]. Let $a \in F$ and $m, n \in \Z$. Then: :$\paren {m n} \cdot a = m \cdot \paren {n \cdot a}$ where $n \cdot a$ is as defined in [[Definition:Integral Multiple|integral multiple]].
We have that $\struct {F^*, \times}$ is the [[Definition:Multiplicative Group|multiplicative group]] of $\struct {F, +, \times}$. Let $a \in F^*$, that is, $a \in F: a \ne 0_F$, where $0_F$ is the [[Definition:Field Zero|zero]] of $F$. This is an instance of [[Powers of Group Elements]] when expressed in [[Definitio...
Integral Multiple of Integral Multiple
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integral_Multiple_of_Integral_Multiple
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integral_Multiple_of_Integral_Multiple
[ "Field Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Integral Multiple" ]
[ "Definition:Multiplicative Group", "Definition:Field Zero", "Powers of Group Elements", "Definition:Additive Notation", "Definition:Field Zero" ]
proofwiki-4262
Product of Integral Multiples
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a field. Let $a, b \in F$ and $m, n \in \Z$. Then: :$\paren {m \cdot a} \times \paren {n \cdot b} = \paren {m n} \cdot \paren {a \times b}$ where $m \cdot a$ is as defined in Integral Multiple.
First let $m = 0$ or $n = 0$. {{WLOG}}, let $m = 0$. The case where $n = 0$ follows the same lines. We have: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall a, b \in R: \forall n \in \Z_{>0} | l = \paren {m \cdot a} \times \paren {n \cdot b} | r = \paren {0 \cdot a} \times \paren {n \cdot b} | c = Definition of $m$...
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]]. Let $a, b \in F$ and $m, n \in \Z$. Then: :$\paren {m \cdot a} \times \paren {n \cdot b} = \paren {m n} \cdot \paren {a \times b}$ where $m \cdot a$ is as defined in [[Definition:Integral Multiple/Rings and Fields|Integral Multiple]].
First let $m = 0$ or $n = 0$. {{WLOG}}, let $m = 0$. The case where $n = 0$ follows the same lines. We have: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall a, b \in R: \forall n \in \Z_{>0} | l = \paren {m \cdot a} \times \paren {n \cdot b} | r = \paren {0 \cdot a} \times \paren {n \cdot b} | c = Definition of...
Product of Integral Multiples/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Integral_Multiples
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Integral_Multiples/Proof_2
[ "Field Theory", "Product of Integral Multiples" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Integral Multiple/Rings and Fields" ]
[ "Definition:Ring Zero", "General Distributivity Theorem", "Powers of Group Elements/Product of Indices/Additive Notation", "Powers of Group Elements" ]
proofwiki-4263
Annihilator of Ring Always Contains Zero
Let $\struct {R, +, \times}$ be a ring. Let $\map {\mathrm {Ann} } R$ be the annihilator of $R$. Then $0 \in \map {\mathrm {Ann} } R$.
We have by definition of integral multiple that: :$\forall r \in R: 0 \cdot r = 0_R$ where $0_R$ is the zero of $R$. Hence the result by definition of annihilator. {{qed}} Category:Ring Theory sky2zptmfq5vwwjsru78klub6slkzlg
Let $\struct {R, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Let $\map {\mathrm {Ann} } R$ be the [[Definition:Annihilator of Ring|annihilator]] of $R$. Then $0 \in \map {\mathrm {Ann} } R$.
We have by definition of [[Definition:Integral Multiple|integral multiple]] that: :$\forall r \in R: 0 \cdot r = 0_R$ where $0_R$ is the [[Definition:Ring Zero|zero]] of $R$. Hence the result by definition of [[Definition:Annihilator of Ring|annihilator]]. {{qed}} [[Category:Ring Theory]] sky2zptmfq5vwwjsru78klub6slk...
Annihilator of Ring Always Contains Zero
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Annihilator_of_Ring_Always_Contains_Zero
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Annihilator_of_Ring_Always_Contains_Zero
[ "Ring Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Annihilator of Ring" ]
[ "Definition:Integral Multiple", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Annihilator of Ring", "Category:Ring Theory" ]
proofwiki-4264
Non-Trivial Annihilator Contains Positive Integer
Let $\left({R, +, \times}\right)$ be a ring with unity. Let $A = \operatorname{Ann} \left({R}\right)$ be the annihilator of $R$. Let $a \in A$ such that $a \ne 0$. Then $A$ contains at least one strictly positive integer.
Let the zero of $R$ be $0_R$ and the unity of $R$ be $1_R$. First we note that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | o = \in | r = \operatorname{Ann} \left({R}\right) | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a \cdot 1_R | r = 0_R | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \left({-a}\right) \cdo...
Let $\left({R, +, \times}\right)$ be a [[Definition:Ring with Unity|ring with unity]]. Let $A = \operatorname{Ann} \left({R}\right)$ be the [[Definition:Annihilator of Ring|annihilator]] of $R$. Let $a \in A$ such that $a \ne 0$. Then $A$ contains at least one [[Definition:Strictly Positive Integer|strictly positiv...
Let the [[Definition:Ring Zero|zero]] of $R$ be $0_R$ and the [[Definition:Unity of Ring|unity]] of $R$ be $1_R$. First we note that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | o = \in | r = \operatorname{Ann} \left({R}\right) | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a \cdot 1_R | r = 0_R | c = }}...
Non-Trivial Annihilator Contains Positive Integer
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Trivial_Annihilator_Contains_Positive_Integer
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Trivial_Annihilator_Contains_Positive_Integer
[ "Rings with Unity" ]
[ "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Annihilator of Ring", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer" ]
[ "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Unity (Abstract Algebra)/Ring", "Definition:Strictly Positive", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer", "Category:Rings with Unity" ]
proofwiki-4265
Area of Sector
Let $\CC = ABC$ be a circle whose center is $A$ and with radii $AB$ and $AC$. Let $BAC$ be the sector of $\CC$ whose angle between $AB$ and $AC$ is $\theta$. :300px Then the area $\AA$ of sector $BAC$ is given by: :$\AA = \dfrac {r^2 \theta} 2$ where: :$r = AB$ is the length of the radius of the circle :$\theta$ is mea...
Let $\CC$ be a circle of radius $r$ whose center $A$ is at the origin and with radii $AB$ and $AC$. Let $B$ and $C$ be arbitrary points on the circumference of $\CC$. Let $C$ be positioned at $\tuple {0, r}$ so that $AC$ coincides with the $y$-axis. Let $BAC$ be the sector of $\CC$ whose angle between $AB$ and $AC$ is ...
Let $\CC = ABC$ be a [[Definition:Circle|circle]] whose [[Definition:Center of Circle|center]] is $A$ and with [[Definition:Radius of Circle|radii]] $AB$ and $AC$. Let $BAC$ be the [[Definition:Sector of Circle|sector]] of $\CC$ whose [[Definition:Angle of Sector|angle]] between $AB$ and $AC$ is $\theta$. :[[File:Sec...
Let $\CC$ be a [[Definition:Circle|circle]] of [[Definition:Radius of Circle|radius]] $r$ whose [[Definition:Center of Circle|center]] $A$ is at the [[Definition:Origin|origin]] and with [[Definition:Radius of Circle|radii]] $AB$ and $AC$. Let $B$ and $C$ be arbitrary [[Definition:Point|points]] on the [[Definition:Ci...
Area of Sector/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Area_of_Sector
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Area_of_Sector/Proof_1
[ "Area of Sector", "Sectors of Circles", "Area Formulas" ]
[ "Definition:Circle", "Definition:Circle/Center", "Definition:Circle/Radius", "Definition:Sector of Circle", "Definition:Sector of Circle/Angle", "File:Sector.png", "Definition:Area", "Definition:Sector of Circle", "Definition:Linear Measure/Length", "Definition:Circle/Radius", "Definition:Circle...
[ "Definition:Circle", "Definition:Circle/Radius", "Definition:Circle/Center", "Definition:Coordinate System/Origin", "Definition:Circle/Radius", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Circumference", "Definition:Axis/Y-Axis", "Definition:Sector of Circle", "Definition:Sector of Circle/Angle", "File:Area...
proofwiki-4266
Area of Sector
Let $\CC = ABC$ be a circle whose center is $A$ and with radii $AB$ and $AC$. Let $BAC$ be the sector of $\CC$ whose angle between $AB$ and $AC$ is $\theta$. :300px Then the area $\AA$ of sector $BAC$ is given by: :$\AA = \dfrac {r^2 \theta} 2$ where: :$r = AB$ is the length of the radius of the circle :$\theta$ is mea...
{{questionable|To be replaced with something rigorous, based on calculus.}} From Area of Circle, the area of $\CC$ is $\pi r^2$. From Measurement of Full Angle, the angle within $\CC$ is $2 \pi$. The fraction of the area of $\CC$ within the sector $BAC$ is therefore $\pi r^2 \times \dfrac \theta {2 \pi}$. Hence the res...
Let $\CC = ABC$ be a [[Definition:Circle|circle]] whose [[Definition:Center of Circle|center]] is $A$ and with [[Definition:Radius of Circle|radii]] $AB$ and $AC$. Let $BAC$ be the [[Definition:Sector of Circle|sector]] of $\CC$ whose [[Definition:Angle of Sector|angle]] between $AB$ and $AC$ is $\theta$. :[[File:Sec...
{{questionable|To be replaced with something rigorous, based on calculus.}} From [[Area of Circle]], the area of $\CC$ is $\pi r^2$. From [[Measurement of Full Angle]], the angle within $\CC$ is $2 \pi$. The fraction of the area of $\CC$ within the sector $BAC$ is therefore $\pi r^2 \times \dfrac \theta {2 \pi}$. H...
Area of Sector/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Area_of_Sector
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Area_of_Sector/Proof_2
[ "Area of Sector", "Sectors of Circles", "Area Formulas" ]
[ "Definition:Circle", "Definition:Circle/Center", "Definition:Circle/Radius", "Definition:Sector of Circle", "Definition:Sector of Circle/Angle", "File:Sector.png", "Definition:Area", "Definition:Sector of Circle", "Definition:Linear Measure/Length", "Definition:Circle/Radius", "Definition:Circle...
[ "Area of Circle", "Measurements of Common Angles/Full Angle" ]
proofwiki-4267
Rational Numbers form Prime Field
The field of rational numbers $\struct {\Q, +, \times}$ is a prime field. That is, the only subset of $\Q$ which sustains both addition and multiplication are $\Q$ and $\set 0$, and vacuously $\O$.
Let $F$ be a subfield of $\struct {\Q, +, \times}$. Then $F$ is by definition a field. Thus by definition: :$\struct {F, +}$ is an abelian group and: :$\struct {F^*, \times}$ is an abelian group, where $F^* = F \setminus \set 0$. and $\times$ is distributive over $+$: :$\forall a, b, c \in F: a \times \paren {b + c} = ...
The [[Definition:Field of Rational Numbers|field of rational numbers]] $\struct {\Q, +, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Prime Field|prime field]]. That is, the only [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $\Q$ which sustains both [[Definition:Rational Addition|addition]] and [[Definition:Rational Multiplication|multiplication]] a...
Let $F$ be a [[Definition:Subfield|subfield]] of $\struct {\Q, +, \times}$. Then $F$ is by definition a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]]. Thus by definition: :$\struct {F, +}$ is an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian group]] and: :$\struct {F^*, \times}$ is an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian group]], ...
Rational Numbers form Prime Field
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Numbers_form_Prime_Field
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Numbers_form_Prime_Field
[ "Rational Numbers", "Prime Fields" ]
[ "Definition:Field of Rational Numbers", "Definition:Prime Field", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Addition/Rational Numbers", "Definition:Multiplication/Rational Numbers", "Definition:Vacuous Truth" ]
[ "Definition:Subfield", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Definition:Distributive Operation", "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Positive/Integer", "Definition:Negative/Integer", "Subfield Test" ]
proofwiki-4268
Field of Integers Modulo Prime is Prime Field
Let $p$ be a prime number. Let $\struct {\Z_p, +, \times}$ be the field of integers modulo $p$. Then $\struct {\Z_p, +, \times}$ is a prime field.
If $\struct {F, +, \times}$ is a subfield of $\struct {\Z_p, +, \times}$, then $\struct {F, +}$ is a subgroup of $\struct {\Z_p, +}$. But from Prime Group has no Proper Subgroups, $\struct {\Z_p, +}$ has no proper subgroup except the trivial group. Hence $F = \Z_p$ and so follows the result. {{qed}}
Let $p$ be a [[Definition:Prime Number|prime number]]. Let $\struct {\Z_p, +, \times}$ be the [[Ring of Integers Modulo Prime is Field|field of integers modulo $p$]]. Then $\struct {\Z_p, +, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Prime Field|prime field]].
If $\struct {F, +, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Subfield|subfield]] of $\struct {\Z_p, +, \times}$, then $\struct {F, +}$ is a [[Definition:Subgroup|subgroup]] of $\struct {\Z_p, +}$. But from [[Prime Group has no Proper Subgroups]], $\struct {\Z_p, +}$ has no [[Definition:Proper Subgroup|proper subgroup]] except the [[...
Field of Integers Modulo Prime is Prime Field
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_of_Integers_Modulo_Prime_is_Prime_Field
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_of_Integers_Modulo_Prime_is_Prime_Field
[ "Modulo Arithmetic", "Prime Fields", "Field of Integers Modulo Prime" ]
[ "Definition:Prime Number", "Ring of Integers Modulo Prime is Field", "Definition:Prime Field" ]
[ "Definition:Subfield", "Definition:Subgroup", "Prime Group has no Proper Subgroups", "Definition:Proper Subgroup", "Definition:Trivial Group" ]
proofwiki-4269
Field has Prime Subfield
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a field. Then $F$ has a subfield which is a prime field.
By definition of field, $F$ is a division ring where $\times$ is commutative. Therefore all division subrings of $F$ are in fact subfields of $F$. By Intersection of All Division Subrings is Prime Subfield, the intersection of all subfields of $F$ is a prime field which is a subfield of $F$. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {F, +, \times}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]]. Then $F$ has a [[Definition:Subfield|subfield]] which is a [[Definition:Prime Field|prime field]].
By definition of [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]], $F$ is a [[Definition:Division Ring|division ring]] where $\times$ is [[Definition:Commutative Operation|commutative]]. Therefore all [[Definition:Division Subring|division subrings]] of $F$ are in fact [[Definition:Subfield|subfields]] of $F$. By [[Inte...
Field has Prime Subfield
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_has_Prime_Subfield
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_has_Prime_Subfield
[ "Subfields" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Subfield", "Definition:Prime Field" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Division Ring", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Division Subring", "Definition:Subfield", "Intersection of All Division Subrings is Prime Subfield", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Subfield", "Definition:Prime Field", "D...
proofwiki-4270
Constant Mapping to Identity is Homomorphism/Rings
Let $\struct {R_1, +_1, \circ_1}$ and $\struct {R_2, +_2, \circ_2}$ be rings with zeroes $0_1$ and $0_2$ respectively. Let $\zeta$ be the zero homomorphism from $R_1$ to $R_2$, that is: :$\forall x \in R_1: \map \zeta x = 0_2$ Then $\zeta$ is a ring homomorphism whose image is $\set {0_2}$ and whose kernel is $R_1$.
The additive groups of $\struct {R_1, +_1, \circ_1}$ and $\struct {R_2, +_2, \circ_2}$ are $\struct {R_1, +_1}$ and $\struct {R_2, +_2}$ respectively. Their identities are $0_1$ and $0_2$ respectively. Thus from the Constant Mapping to Group Identity is Homomorphism we have that $\zeta: \struct {R_1, +_1} \to \struct {...
Let $\struct {R_1, +_1, \circ_1}$ and $\struct {R_2, +_2, \circ_2}$ be [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|rings]] with [[Definition:Ring Zero|zeroes]] $0_1$ and $0_2$ respectively. Let $\zeta$ be the [[Definition:Zero Homomorphism|zero homomorphism]] from $R_1$ to $R_2$, that is: :$\forall x \in R_1: \map \zeta x = ...
The [[Definition:Additive Group of Ring|additive groups]] of $\struct {R_1, +_1, \circ_1}$ and $\struct {R_2, +_2, \circ_2}$ are $\struct {R_1, +_1}$ and $\struct {R_2, +_2}$ respectively. Their [[Definition:Identity Element|identities]] are $0_1$ and $0_2$ respectively. Thus from the [[Constant Mapping to Group Iden...
Constant Mapping to Identity is Homomorphism/Rings
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Constant_Mapping_to_Identity_is_Homomorphism/Rings
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Constant_Mapping_to_Identity_is_Homomorphism/Rings
[ "Constant Mapping to Identity is Homomorphism", "Ring Homomorphisms" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Zero Homomorphism", "Definition:Ring Homomorphism", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping", "Definition:Kernel of Ring Homomorphism" ]
[ "Definition:Additive Group of Ring", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Constant Mapping to Identity is Homomorphism/Groups", "Definition:Group Homomorphism", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping", "Definition:Kernel of Ring Homomorphism" ]
proofwiki-4271
Constant Mapping to Identity is Homomorphism/Groups
Let $\struct {G_1, \circ_1}$ and $\struct {G_2, \circ_2}$ be groups with identities $e_1$ and $e_2$ respectively. Let $\phi_e: \struct {G_1, \circ_1} \to \struct {G_2, \circ_2}$ be the constant mapping defined as: :$\forall x \in G_1: \map {\phi_e} x = e_2$ Then $\phi_e$ is a group homomorphism whose image is $\set {e_...
Let $x, y \in G_1$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map {\phi_e} {x \circ_1 y} | r = e_2 | c = as $x \circ_1 y \in G_1$ }} {{eqn | r = \map {\phi_e} x \circ_2 \map {\phi_e} y | c = as $\map {\phi_e} x = e_2$ and $\map {\phi_e} y = e_2$ }} {{end-eqn}} So $\phi_e$ is a group homomorphism. The results a...
Let $\struct {G_1, \circ_1}$ and $\struct {G_2, \circ_2}$ be [[Definition:Group|groups]] with [[Definition:Identity Element|identities]] $e_1$ and $e_2$ respectively. Let $\phi_e: \struct {G_1, \circ_1} \to \struct {G_2, \circ_2}$ be the [[Definition:Constant Mapping|constant mapping]] defined as: :$\forall x \in G_1:...
Let $x, y \in G_1$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map {\phi_e} {x \circ_1 y} | r = e_2 | c = as $x \circ_1 y \in G_1$ }} {{eqn | r = \map {\phi_e} x \circ_2 \map {\phi_e} y | c = as $\map {\phi_e} x = e_2$ and $\map {\phi_e} y = e_2$ }} {{end-eqn}} So $\phi_e$ is a [[Definition:Group Homomorphi...
Constant Mapping to Identity is Homomorphism/Groups
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Constant_Mapping_to_Identity_is_Homomorphism/Groups
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Constant_Mapping_to_Identity_is_Homomorphism/Groups
[ "Constant Mapping to Identity is Homomorphism", "Group Homomorphisms" ]
[ "Definition:Group", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Constant Mapping", "Definition:Group Homomorphism", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping", "Definition:Kernel of Group Homomorphism" ]
[ "Definition:Group Homomorphism", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping", "Definition:Kernel of Group Homomorphism" ]
proofwiki-4272
Identity Mapping is Automorphism/Groups
Let $\struct {G, \circ}$ be a group whose identity is $e$. Then $I_G: \struct {G, \circ} \to \struct {G, \circ}$ is a group automorphism. Its kernel is $\set e$.
The main result Identity Mapping is Automorphism holds directly. As $I_G$ is a bijection, the only element that maps to $e$ is $e$ itself. Thus the kernel is $\set e$. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {G, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Group|group]] whose [[Definition:Identity Element|identity]] is $e$. Then $I_G: \struct {G, \circ} \to \struct {G, \circ}$ is a [[Definition:Group Automorphism|group automorphism]]. Its [[Definition:Kernel of Group Homomorphism|kernel]] is $\set e$.
The main result [[Identity Mapping is Automorphism]] holds directly. As $I_G$ is a [[Definition:Bijection|bijection]], the only element that maps to $e$ is $e$ itself. Thus the [[Definition:Kernel of Group Homomorphism|kernel]] is $\set e$. {{qed}}
Identity Mapping is Automorphism/Groups
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Identity_Mapping_is_Automorphism/Groups
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Identity_Mapping_is_Automorphism/Groups
[ "Group Automorphisms", "Identity Mappings" ]
[ "Definition:Group", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Group Automorphism", "Definition:Kernel of Group Homomorphism" ]
[ "Identity Mapping is Automorphism", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Kernel of Group Homomorphism" ]
proofwiki-4273
Identity Mapping is Automorphism/Rings
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a ring whose zero is $0$. Then $I_R: \struct {R, +, \circ} \to \struct {R, +, \circ}$ is a ring automorphism. Its kernel is $\set 0$.
The result Identity Mapping is Automorphism holds directly, for both $+$ and $\circ$. As $I_R$ is a bijection, the only element that maps to $0$ is $0$ itself. Thus the kernel is $\set 0$. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]] whose [[Definition:Ring Zero|zero]] is $0$. Then $I_R: \struct {R, +, \circ} \to \struct {R, +, \circ}$ is a [[Definition:Ring Automorphism|ring automorphism]]. Its [[Definition:Kernel of Ring Homomorphism|kernel]] is $\set 0$.
The result [[Identity Mapping is Automorphism]] holds directly, for both $+$ and $\circ$. As $I_R$ is a [[Definition:Bijection|bijection]], the only element that maps to $0$ is $0$ itself. Thus the [[Definition:Kernel of Ring Homomorphism|kernel]] is $\set 0$. {{qed}}
Identity Mapping is Automorphism/Rings
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Identity_Mapping_is_Automorphism/Rings
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Identity_Mapping_is_Automorphism/Rings
[ "Ring Automorphisms", "Identity Mappings" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Ring Automorphism", "Definition:Kernel of Ring Homomorphism" ]
[ "Identity Mapping is Automorphism", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Kernel of Ring Homomorphism" ]
proofwiki-4274
Ring Monomorphism from Integers to Rationals
Let $\phi: \Z \to \Q$ be the mapping from the integers $\Z$ to the rational numbers $\Q$ defined as: :$\forall x \in \Z: \map \phi x = \dfrac x 1$ Then $\phi$ is a (ring) monomorphism, but specifically not an epimorphism.
First note that: :$\forall a, b \in \Z: a \ne b \implies \dfrac a 1 = \map \phi a \ne \map \phi b = \dfrac b 1$ and so clearly $\phi$ is an injection. However, take for example $\dfrac 1 2$: :$\not \exists a \in \Z: \map \phi a = \dfrac 1 2$ as $\dfrac 1 2 \notin \Img \phi$. So $\phi$ is not a surjection. Next let $a,...
Let $\phi: \Z \to \Q$ be the [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] from the [[Definition:Integer|integers]] $\Z$ to the [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] $\Q$ defined as: :$\forall x \in \Z: \map \phi x = \dfrac x 1$ Then $\phi$ is a [[Definition:Ring Monomorphism|(ring) monomorphism]], but specifically not an...
First note that: :$\forall a, b \in \Z: a \ne b \implies \dfrac a 1 = \map \phi a \ne \map \phi b = \dfrac b 1$ and so clearly $\phi$ is an [[Definition:Injection|injection]]. However, take for example $\dfrac 1 2$: :$\not \exists a \in \Z: \map \phi a = \dfrac 1 2$ as $\dfrac 1 2 \notin \Img \phi$. So $\phi$ is not...
Ring Monomorphism from Integers to Rationals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Monomorphism_from_Integers_to_Rationals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Monomorphism_from_Integers_to_Rationals
[ "Ring Monomorphisms", "Integers", "Rational Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Ring Monomorphism", "Definition:Ring Epimorphism" ]
[ "Definition:Injection", "Definition:Surjection", "Definition:Injection", "Definition:Surjection", "Definition:Ring Homomorphism", "Definition:Ring Monomorphism", "Definition:Ring Epimorphism" ]
proofwiki-4275
Field Homomorphism Preserves Unity
Let $\phi: \struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1} \to \struct {F_2, +_2, \times_2}$ be a field homomorphism. Let: :$1_{F_1}$ be the unity of $F_1$ :$1_{F_2}$ be the unity of $F_2$. Then: :$\map \phi {1_{F_1} } = 1_{F_2}$
By definition, if $\struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1}$ and $\struct {F_2, +_2, \times_2}$ are fields then $\struct {F_1^*, \times_1}$ and $\struct {F_2^*, \times_2}$ are groups. Again by definition: :the unity of $\struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1}$ is the identity of $\struct {F_1^*, \times_1}$ :the unity of $\struct {F_2, +_2, \...
Let $\phi: \struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1} \to \struct {F_2, +_2, \times_2}$ be a [[Definition:Field Homomorphism|field homomorphism]]. Let: :$1_{F_1}$ be the [[Definition:Unity of Field|unity]] of $F_1$ :$1_{F_2}$ be the [[Definition:Unity of Field|unity]] of $F_2$. Then: :$\map \phi {1_{F_1} } = 1_{F_2}$
By definition, if $\struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1}$ and $\struct {F_2, +_2, \times_2}$ are [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|fields]] then $\struct {F_1^*, \times_1}$ and $\struct {F_2^*, \times_2}$ are [[Definition:Group|groups]]. Again by definition: :the [[Definition:Unity of Field|unity]] of $\struct {F_1, +_1, \...
Field Homomorphism Preserves Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_Homomorphism_Preserves_Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_Homomorphism_Preserves_Unity
[ "Field Homomorphisms" ]
[ "Definition:Field Homomorphism", "Definition:Multiplicative Identity", "Definition:Multiplicative Identity" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Group", "Definition:Multiplicative Identity", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Multiplicative Identity", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Group Homomorphism Preserves Identity" ]
proofwiki-4276
Field Homomorphism Preserves Product Inverses
Let $\phi: \struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1} \to \struct {F_2, +_2, \times_2}$ be a field homomorphism. Then: :$\forall x \in F_1^*: \map \phi {x^{-1} } = \map \phi x^{-1}$
By definition, if $\struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1}$ and $\struct {F_2, +_2, \times_2}$ are fields then $\struct {F_1^*, \times_1}$ and $\struct {F_2^*, \times_2}$ are groups. Again by definition: :the product inverse of $x$ in $\struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1}$ for $\times_1$ is the product inverse of $x$ in $\struct {F_1^*, ...
Let $\phi: \struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1} \to \struct {F_2, +_2, \times_2}$ be a [[Definition:Field Homomorphism|field homomorphism]]. Then: :$\forall x \in F_1^*: \map \phi {x^{-1} } = \map \phi x^{-1}$
By definition, if $\struct {F_1, +_1, \times_1}$ and $\struct {F_2, +_2, \times_2}$ are [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|fields]] then $\struct {F_1^*, \times_1}$ and $\struct {F_2^*, \times_2}$ are [[Definition:Group|groups]]. Again by definition: :the [[Definition:Product Inverse|product inverse]] of $x$ in $\s...
Field Homomorphism Preserves Product Inverses
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_Homomorphism_Preserves_Product_Inverses
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_Homomorphism_Preserves_Product_Inverses
[ "Field Homomorphisms" ]
[ "Definition:Field Homomorphism" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Group", "Definition:Product Inverse", "Definition:Product Inverse", "Definition:Product Inverse", "Definition:Product Inverse", "Group Homomorphism Preserves Inverses" ]
proofwiki-4277
Ring Homomorphism from Field is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism
Let $\struct {F, +_F, \circ}$ be a field whose zero is $0_F$. Let $\struct {S, +_S, *}$ be a ring whose zero is $0_S$. Let $\phi: F \to S$ be a ring homomorphism. Then either: :$(1): \quad \phi$ is a monomorphism (that is, $\phi$ is injective) or :$(2): \quad \phi$ is the zero homomorphism (that is, $\forall a \in F: \...
We have by definition that a field is a division ring. The result can be seen to be an application of Ring Homomorphism from Division Ring is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {F, +_F, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] whose [[Definition:Field Zero|zero]] is $0_F$. Let $\struct {S, +_S, *}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]] whose [[Definition:Ring Zero|zero]] is $0_S$. Let $\phi: F \to S$ be a [[Definition:Ring Homomorphism|ring homomorp...
We have by definition that a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] is a [[Definition:Division Ring|division ring]]. The result can be seen to be an application of [[Ring Homomorphism from Division Ring is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism]]. {{qed}}
Ring Homomorphism from Field is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Homomorphism_from_Field_is_Monomorphism_or_Zero_Homomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Homomorphism_from_Field_is_Monomorphism_or_Zero_Homomorphism/Proof_1
[ "Ring Homomorphism from Field is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism", "Field Theory", "Monomorphisms (Abstract Algebra)" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field Zero", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Ring Homomorphism", "Definition:Ring Monomorphism", "Definition:Injection", "Definition:Zero Homomorphism" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Division Ring", "Ring Homomorphism from Division Ring is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism" ]
proofwiki-4278
Ring Homomorphism from Field is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism
Let $\struct {F, +_F, \circ}$ be a field whose zero is $0_F$. Let $\struct {S, +_S, *}$ be a ring whose zero is $0_S$. Let $\phi: F \to S$ be a ring homomorphism. Then either: :$(1): \quad \phi$ is a monomorphism (that is, $\phi$ is injective) or :$(2): \quad \phi$ is the zero homomorphism (that is, $\forall a \in F: \...
Let $\phi: F \to S$ be a ring homomorphism. Suppose $\phi$ is not a monomorphism. By definition, $\phi$ is not an injection. So there must exist $a, b \in F: \map \phi a = \map \phi b$. Let $k = a +_F \paren {-b}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \phi k | r = \map \phi {a +_F \paren {-b} } | c = }} {{...
Let $\struct {F, +_F, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] whose [[Definition:Field Zero|zero]] is $0_F$. Let $\struct {S, +_S, *}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]] whose [[Definition:Ring Zero|zero]] is $0_S$. Let $\phi: F \to S$ be a [[Definition:Ring Homomorphism|ring homomorp...
Let $\phi: F \to S$ be a [[Definition:Ring Homomorphism|ring homomorphism]]. Suppose $\phi$ is not a [[Definition:Ring Monomorphism|monomorphism]]. By definition, $\phi$ is not an [[Definition:Injection|injection]]. So there must exist $a, b \in F: \map \phi a = \map \phi b$. Let $k = a +_F \paren {-b}$. Then: {{...
Ring Homomorphism from Field is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Homomorphism_from_Field_is_Monomorphism_or_Zero_Homomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ring_Homomorphism_from_Field_is_Monomorphism_or_Zero_Homomorphism/Proof_2
[ "Ring Homomorphism from Field is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism", "Field Theory", "Monomorphisms (Abstract Algebra)" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field Zero", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Ring Homomorphism", "Definition:Ring Monomorphism", "Definition:Injection", "Definition:Zero Homomorphism" ]
[ "Definition:Ring Homomorphism", "Definition:Ring Monomorphism", "Definition:Injection", "Definition:Product Inverse", "Definition:Ring Monomorphism", "Definition:Zero Homomorphism" ]
proofwiki-4279
Power to Characteristic of Field is Monomorphism
Let $F$ be a field whose zero is $0_F$ and whose unity is $1_F$. Let the characteristic of $F$ be $p$ where $p \ne 0$. Let $\phi: F \to F$ be the mapping on $F$ defined as: :$\forall x \in F: \map \phi x = x^p$ Then $\phi$ is a (field) monomorphism.
Let $a, b \in F$. First note that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall k: 0 < k < p | l = \binom p k | o = \equiv | r = 0 | rr= \pmod p | c = Binomial Coefficient of Prime }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \binom p k | r = r p | c = for some $r \in \Z$ }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto ...
Let $F$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] whose [[Definition:Field Zero|zero]] is $0_F$ and whose [[Definition:Unity of Field|unity]] is $1_F$. Let the [[Definition:Characteristic of Field|characteristic]] of $F$ be $p$ where $p \ne 0$. Let $\phi: F \to F$ be the [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] on $F$...
Let $a, b \in F$. First note that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall k: 0 < k < p | l = \binom p k | o = \equiv | r = 0 | rr= \pmod p | c = [[Binomial Coefficient of Prime]] }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \binom p k | r = r p | c = for some $r \in \Z$ }} {{eqn | ll= \lea...
Power to Characteristic of Field is Monomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_to_Characteristic_of_Field_is_Monomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_to_Characteristic_of_Field_is_Monomorphism
[ "Characteristics of Fields", "Field Monomorphisms" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field Zero", "Definition:Multiplicative Identity", "Definition:Characteristic of Field", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Field Monomorphism" ]
[ "Binomial Coefficient of Prime", "Characteristic of Field by Annihilator/Prime Characteristic", "Binomial Theorem", "Power of Product of Commutative Elements in Monoid", "Definition:Field Homomorphism", "Definition:Zero Homomorphism", "Power of Identity is Identity", "Ring Homomorphism from Field is M...
proofwiki-4280
Power to Characteristic Power of Field is Monomorphism
Let $F$ be a field whose characteristic is $p$ where $p \ne 0$. Let $n \in \Z_{\ge 0}$ be any positive integer. Let $\phi_n: F \to F$ be the mapping on $F$ defined as: :$\forall x \in F: \map {\phi_n} x = x^{p^n}$ Then $\phi_n$ is a (field) monomorphism.
Proof by induction: For all $n \in \Z_{\ge 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :$\phi_n$ is a (field) monomorphism. $\map P 0$ is trivially true: :$\map {\phi_0} x = x^{p^0} = x^1 = x$ and we see that $\phi_0$ is the identity automorphism. This is not the zero homomorphism. So from Ring Homomorphism from Field is M...
Let $F$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] whose [[Definition:Characteristic of Field|characteristic]] is $p$ where $p \ne 0$. Let $n \in \Z_{\ge 0}$ be any [[Definition:Positive Integer|positive integer]]. Let $\phi_n: F \to F$ be the [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] on $F$ defined as: :$\forall x \in ...
Proof by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]]: For all $n \in \Z_{\ge 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$\phi_n$ is a [[Definition:Field Monomorphism|(field) monomorphism]]. $\map P 0$ is trivially true: :$\map {\phi_0} x = x^{p^0} = x^1 = x$ and we see that $\phi_0$ is ...
Power to Characteristic Power of Field is Monomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_to_Characteristic_Power_of_Field_is_Monomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_to_Characteristic_Power_of_Field_is_Monomorphism
[ "Characteristics of Fields", "Field Monomorphisms" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Characteristic of Field", "Definition:Positive/Integer", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Field Monomorphism" ]
[ "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Proposition", "Definition:Field Monomorphism", "Definition:Identity Automorphism", "Definition:Zero Homomorphism", "Ring Homomorphism from Field is Monomorphism or Zero Homomorphism", "Definition:Field Monomorphism", "Definition:Field Monomorphism", ...
proofwiki-4281
Scalar Product with Identity
:$\lambda \ast e = 0_R \ast x = e$
From {{Module-axiom|1}}, $y \to \lambda \ast y$ is an endomorphism of $\struct {G, +_G}$. From {{Module-axiom|2}}, $\mu \to \mu \ast x$ is a homomorphism from $\struct {R, +_R}$ to $\struct {G, +_G}$. The result follows from Homomorphism with Cancellable Codomain Preserves Identity. {{qed}}
:$\lambda \ast e = 0_R \ast x = e$
From {{Module-axiom|1}}, $y \to \lambda \ast y$ is an [[Definition:Endomorphism|endomorphism]] of $\struct {G, +_G}$. From {{Module-axiom|2}}, $\mu \to \mu \ast x$ is a [[Definition:Homomorphism (Abstract Algebra)|homomorphism]] from $\struct {R, +_R}$ to $\struct {G, +_G}$. The result follows from [[Homomorphism wit...
Scalar Product with Identity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Identity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Identity
[ "Module Theory" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Endomorphism", "Definition:Homomorphism (Abstract Algebra)", "Homomorphism with Cancellable Codomain Preserves Identity" ]
proofwiki-4282
Scalar Product with Inverse
:$\lambda \ast \struct {-x} = \struct {-\lambda} \ast x = -\struct {\lambda \ast x}$
From {{Module-axiom|1}}, $y \to \lambda \ast y$ is an endomorphism of $\struct {G, +_G}$. From {{Module-axiom|2}}, $\mu \to \mu \ast x$ is a homomorphism from $\struct {R, +_R}$ to $\struct {G, +_G}$. The result follows from Homomorphism with Identity Preserves Inverses. {{qed}}
:$\lambda \ast \struct {-x} = \struct {-\lambda} \ast x = -\struct {\lambda \ast x}$
From {{Module-axiom|1}}, $y \to \lambda \ast y$ is an [[Definition:Endomorphism|endomorphism]] of $\struct {G, +_G}$. From {{Module-axiom|2}}, $\mu \to \mu \ast x$ is a [[Definition:Homomorphism (Abstract Algebra)|homomorphism]] from $\struct {R, +_R}$ to $\struct {G, +_G}$. The result follows from [[Homomorphism wit...
Scalar Product with Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Inverse
[ "Module Theory" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Endomorphism", "Definition:Homomorphism (Abstract Algebra)", "Homomorphism with Identity Preserves Inverses" ]
proofwiki-4283
Scalar Product with Sum
:$\ds \lambda \ast \paren {\sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m x_k} = \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \paren {\lambda \ast x_k}$
This follows by induction from {{Module-axiom|1}}, as follows: For all $m \in \N_{>0}$, let $\map P m$ be the proposition: :$\ds \lambda \ast \paren {\sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m x_k} = \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \paren {\lambda \ast x_k}$
:$\ds \lambda \ast \paren {\sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m x_k} = \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \paren {\lambda \ast x_k}$
This follows by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]] from {{Module-axiom|1}}, as follows: For all $m \in \N_{>0}$, let $\map P m$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$\ds \lambda \ast \paren {\sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m x_k} = \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \paren {\lambda \ast x_k}$
Scalar Product with Sum
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Sum
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Sum
[ "Module Theory" ]
[]
[ "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Proposition", "Principle of Mathematical Induction" ]
proofwiki-4284
Product with Sum of Scalar
:$\ds \paren {\sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \lambda_k} \ast x = \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \paren {\lambda_k \ast x}$
This follows by induction from {{Module-axiom|2}}, as follows. For all $m \in \N_{>0}$, let $\map P m$ be the proposition: :$\ds \paren {\sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \lambda_k} \ast x = \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \paren {\lambda_k \ast x}$
:$\ds \paren {\sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \lambda_k} \ast x = \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \paren {\lambda_k \ast x}$
This follows by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]] from {{Module-axiom|2}}, as follows. For all $m \in \N_{>0}$, let $\map P m$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$\ds \paren {\sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \lambda_k} \ast x = \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^m \paren {\lambda_k \ast x}$
Product with Sum of Scalar
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_with_Sum_of_Scalar
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_with_Sum_of_Scalar
[ "Module Theory" ]
[]
[ "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Proposition", "Principle of Mathematical Induction" ]
proofwiki-4285
Scalar Product with Product
:$\lambda \ast \paren {n \cdot x} = n \cdot \paren {\lambda \ast x} = \paren {n \cdot \lambda} \ast x$
First let $n = 0$. The assertion follows directly from Scalar Product with Identity. Next, let $n > 0$. The assertion follows directly from Scalar Product with Sum and Product with Sum of Scalar, by letting $m = n$ and making all the $\lambda$s and $x$s the same. Finally, let $n < 0$. The assertion follows from Scalar ...
:$\lambda \ast \paren {n \cdot x} = n \cdot \paren {\lambda \ast x} = \paren {n \cdot \lambda} \ast x$
First let $n = 0$. The assertion follows directly from [[Scalar Product with Identity]]. Next, let $n > 0$. The assertion follows directly from [[Scalar Product with Sum]] and [[Product with Sum of Scalar]], by letting $m = n$ and making all the $\lambda$s and $x$s the same. Finally, let $n < 0$. The assertion f...
Scalar Product with Product
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Product
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Product
[ "Module Theory" ]
[]
[ "Scalar Product with Identity", "Scalar Product with Sum", "Product with Sum of Scalar", "Scalar Product with Product", "Scalar Product with Inverse", "Index Laws for Monoids/Negative Index" ]
proofwiki-4286
Zero Vector is Linearly Dependent
Let $G$ be a group whose identity is $e$. Let $R$ be a ring with unity whose zero is $0_R$ and whose unity is $1_R$. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \circ}_R$ be a unitary $R$-module. Then the singleton set $\set e$ consisting of the zero vector is linearly dependent.
By Scalar Product with Identity we have: :$\forall \lambda \in R: \lambda \circ e = e$ Hence the result by definition of linearly dependent. {{qed}}
Let $G$ be a [[Definition:Group|group]] whose [[Definition:Identity Element|identity]] is $e$. Let $R$ be a [[Definition:Ring with Unity|ring with unity]] whose [[Definition:Ring Zero|zero]] is $0_R$ and whose [[Definition:Unity of Ring|unity]] is $1_R$. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \circ}_R$ be a [[Definition:Unitary Modul...
By [[Scalar Product with Identity]] we have: :$\forall \lambda \in R: \lambda \circ e = e$ Hence the result by definition of [[Definition:Linearly Dependent Set|linearly dependent]]. {{qed}}
Zero Vector is Linearly Dependent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Zero_Vector_is_Linearly_Dependent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Zero_Vector_is_Linearly_Dependent
[ "Linear Dependence" ]
[ "Definition:Group", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Unity (Abstract Algebra)/Ring", "Definition:Unitary Module over Ring", "Definition:Singleton", "Definition:Zero Vector", "Definition:Linearly Dependent/S...
[ "Scalar Product with Identity", "Definition:Linearly Dependent/Set" ]
proofwiki-4287
Expression of Vector as Linear Combination from Basis is Unique
Let $V$ be a vector space of dimension $n$. Let $\BB = \set {\mathbf x_1, \mathbf x_2, \ldots, \mathbf x_n}$ be a basis for $V$. Let $\mathbf x \in V$ be any vector of $V$. Then $\mathbf x$ can be expressed as a unique linear combination of elements of $\BB$. {{explain|The definition we have of linear combination doesn...
=== Proof of Existence === By the definition of basis, $\BB$ is a spanning set. Hence the result, by the definition of spanning set. {{qed|lemma}}
Let $V$ be a [[Definition:Vector Space|vector space]] of [[Definition:Dimension (Linear Algebra)|dimension]] $n$. Let $\BB = \set {\mathbf x_1, \mathbf x_2, \ldots, \mathbf x_n}$ be a [[Definition:Basis of Vector Space|basis]] for $V$. Let $\mathbf x \in V$ be any [[Definition:Vector (Linear Algebra)|vector]] of $V$....
=== Proof of Existence === By the definition of [[Definition:Basis of Vector Space|basis]], $\BB$ is a [[Definition:Spanning Set of Vector Space|spanning set]]. Hence the result, by the definition of [[Definition:Spanning Set of Vector Space|spanning set]]. {{qed|lemma}}
Expression of Vector as Linear Combination from Basis is Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Expression_of_Vector_as_Linear_Combination_from_Basis_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Expression_of_Vector_as_Linear_Combination_from_Basis_is_Unique
[ "Linear Algebra", "Bases of Vector Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Vector Space", "Definition:Dimension (Linear Algebra)", "Definition:Basis of Vector Space", "Definition:Vector/Linear Algebra", "Definition:Unique", "Definition:Linear Combination" ]
[ "Definition:Basis of Vector Space", "Definition:Generator of Vector Space", "Definition:Generator of Vector Space", "Definition:Basis of Vector Space" ]
proofwiki-4288
Generator of Vector Space Contains Basis
:$G$ contains a basis for $E$.
From: :Vector Space has Basis Between Linearly Independent Set and Finite Spanning Set :Bases of Finitely Generated Vector Space have Equal Cardinality and :Sufficient Conditions for Basis of Finite Dimensional Vector Space all we need to do is show that every infinite generator $S$ for $E$ contains a finite generator....
:$G$ contains a [[Definition:Basis of Vector Space|basis]] for $E$.
From: :[[Vector Space has Basis Between Linearly Independent Set and Finite Spanning Set]] :[[Bases of Finitely Generated Vector Space have Equal Cardinality]] and :[[Sufficient Conditions for Basis of Finite Dimensional Vector Space]] all we need to do is show that every [[Definition:Infinite Set|infinite]] [[Definiti...
Generator of Vector Space Contains Basis
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Generator_of_Vector_Space_Contains_Basis
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Generator_of_Vector_Space_Contains_Basis
[ "Bases of Vector Spaces", "Generators of Vector Spaces", "Generator of Vector Space Contains Basis" ]
[ "Definition:Basis of Vector Space" ]
[ "Vector Space has Basis Between Linearly Independent Set and Finite Spanning Set", "Bases of Finitely Generated Vector Space have Equal Cardinality", "Sufficient Conditions for Basis of Finite Dimensional Vector Space", "Definition:Infinite Set", "Definition:Generator of Vector Space", "Definition:Finite ...
proofwiki-4289
Cardinality of Linearly Independent Set is No Greater than Dimension
:$H$ has at most $n$ elements.
Let $H$ be a linearly independent subset of $E$. By definition of dimension of vector space, $E$ has a basis with exactly $n$ elements. By Sufficient Conditions for Basis of Finite Dimensional Vector Space, $B$ is a generator for $E$. Then by Size of Linearly Independent Subset is at Most Size of Finite Generator, $H$ ...
:$H$ has at most $n$ [[Definition:Element|elements]].
Let $H$ be a [[Definition:Linearly Independent Set|linearly independent subset]] of $E$. By definition of [[Definition:Dimension of Vector Space|dimension of vector space]], $E$ has a [[Definition:Basis of Vector Space|basis]] with exactly $n$ [[Definition:Element|elements]]. By [[Sufficient Conditions for Basis of F...
Cardinality of Linearly Independent Set is No Greater than Dimension
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinality_of_Linearly_Independent_Set_is_No_Greater_than_Dimension
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinality_of_Linearly_Independent_Set_is_No_Greater_than_Dimension
[ "Linear Independence" ]
[ "Definition:Element" ]
[ "Definition:Linearly Independent/Set", "Definition:Dimension of Vector Space", "Definition:Basis of Vector Space", "Definition:Element", "Sufficient Conditions for Basis of Finite Dimensional Vector Space", "Definition:Generator of Module", "Size of Linearly Independent Subset is at Most Size of Finite ...
proofwiki-4290
Cardinality of Generator of Vector Space is not Less than Dimension
Let $V$ be a vector space over a field $F$. Let $\BB$ be a generator for $V$ containing $m$ elements. Then: :$\map {\dim_F} V \le m$ where $\map {\dim_F} V$ is the dimension of $V$.
Let $\BB = \set {x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_m}$ be a generator for $G$. Let $\set {y_1, y_2, \ldots, y_n}$ be a subset of $G$ such that $n > m$. As $\BB$ generates $G$, there exist $\alpha_{i j} \in F$ where $1 \le i \le m, 1 \le j \le n$ such that: :$\ds \forall j: 1 \le j \le n: y_j = \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^m \alpha_{i j} x_i...
Let $V$ be a [[Definition:Vector Space|vector space]] over a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] $F$. Let $\BB$ be a [[Definition:Generator of Vector Space|generator]] for $V$ containing $m$ [[Definition:Element|elements]]. Then: :$\map {\dim_F} V \le m$ where $\map {\dim_F} V$ is the [[Definition:Dimensio...
Let $\BB = \set {x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_m}$ be a [[Definition:Generator of Vector Space|generator]] for $G$. Let $\set {y_1, y_2, \ldots, y_n}$ be a [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $G$ such that $n > m$. As $\BB$ [[Definition:Generator of Module|generates]] $G$, there exist $\alpha_{i j} \in F$ where $1 \le i \le m, 1 ...
Cardinality of Generator of Vector Space is not Less than Dimension/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinality_of_Generator_of_Vector_Space_is_not_Less_than_Dimension
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinality_of_Generator_of_Vector_Space_is_not_Less_than_Dimension/Proof_1
[ "Cardinality of Generator of Vector Space is not Less than Dimension", "Generators of Vector Spaces", "Dimension of Vector Space" ]
[ "Definition:Vector Space", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Generator of Vector Space", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Dimension of Vector Space" ]
[ "Definition:Generator of Vector Space", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Generator of Module", "Homogeneous Simultaneous Linear Equations with More Unknowns than Equations", "Definition:Linearly Dependent/Set", "Definition:Dimension of Vector Space" ]
proofwiki-4291
Cardinality of Generator of Vector Space is not Less than Dimension
Let $V$ be a vector space over a field $F$. Let $\BB$ be a generator for $V$ containing $m$ elements. Then: :$\map {\dim_F} V \le m$ where $\map {\dim_F} V$ is the dimension of $V$.
From Generator of Vector Space Contains Basis there exists a basis $B$ of $E$ such that $B \subseteq G$. From Cardinality of Basis of Vector Space, $\card B = n$. The result follows. {{qed}}
Let $V$ be a [[Definition:Vector Space|vector space]] over a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] $F$. Let $\BB$ be a [[Definition:Generator of Vector Space|generator]] for $V$ containing $m$ [[Definition:Element|elements]]. Then: :$\map {\dim_F} V \le m$ where $\map {\dim_F} V$ is the [[Definition:Dimensio...
From [[Generator of Vector Space Contains Basis]] there exists a [[Definition:Basis of Vector Space|basis]] $B$ of $E$ such that $B \subseteq G$. From [[Cardinality of Basis of Vector Space]], $\card B = n$. The result follows. {{qed}}
Cardinality of Generator of Vector Space is not Less than Dimension/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinality_of_Generator_of_Vector_Space_is_not_Less_than_Dimension
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinality_of_Generator_of_Vector_Space_is_not_Less_than_Dimension/Proof_2
[ "Cardinality of Generator of Vector Space is not Less than Dimension", "Generators of Vector Spaces", "Dimension of Vector Space" ]
[ "Definition:Vector Space", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Generator of Vector Space", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Dimension of Vector Space" ]
[ "Generator of Vector Space Contains Basis", "Definition:Basis of Vector Space", "Cardinality of Basis of Vector Space" ]
proofwiki-4292
Trichotomy Law for Real Numbers
The real numbers obey the '''trichotomy law'''. That is, $\forall a, b \in \R$, exactly one of the following holds: {{begin-axiom}} {{axiom | n = 1 | lc= $a$ is greater than $b$: | m = a > b }} {{axiom | n = 2 | lc= $a$ is equal to $b$: | m = a = b }} {{axiom | n = 3 | lc= $a$ is...
This follows directly Real Numbers form Totally Ordered Field. {{Qed}}
The [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]] obey the '''[[Trichotomy Law (Ordering)|trichotomy law]]'''. That is, $\forall a, b \in \R$, exactly one of the following holds: {{begin-axiom}} {{axiom | n = 1 | lc= $a$ is greater than $b$: | m = a > b }} {{axiom | n = 2 | lc= $a$ is equal to $b$: ...
This follows directly [[Real Numbers form Totally Ordered Field]]. {{Qed}}
Trichotomy Law for Real Numbers/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trichotomy_Law_for_Real_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trichotomy_Law_for_Real_Numbers/Proof_1
[ "Trichotomy Law for Real Numbers", "Real Numbers", "Inequalities", "Trichotomy Law" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Trichotomy Law (Ordering)" ]
[ "Real Numbers form Totally Ordered Field" ]
proofwiki-4293
Trichotomy Law for Real Numbers
The real numbers obey the '''trichotomy law'''. That is, $\forall a, b \in \R$, exactly one of the following holds: {{begin-axiom}} {{axiom | n = 1 | lc= $a$ is greater than $b$: | m = a > b }} {{axiom | n = 2 | lc= $a$ is equal to $b$: | m = a = b }} {{axiom | n = 3 | lc= $a$ is...
$\le$ is a total ordering on $\R$. The trichotomy follows directly from Trichotomy Law. {{Qed}}
The [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]] obey the '''[[Trichotomy Law (Ordering)|trichotomy law]]'''. That is, $\forall a, b \in \R$, exactly one of the following holds: {{begin-axiom}} {{axiom | n = 1 | lc= $a$ is greater than $b$: | m = a > b }} {{axiom | n = 2 | lc= $a$ is equal to $b$: ...
$\le$ is a [[Definition:Total Ordering|total ordering]] on $\R$. The trichotomy follows directly from [[Trichotomy Law (Ordering)|Trichotomy Law]]. {{Qed}}
Trichotomy Law for Real Numbers/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trichotomy_Law_for_Real_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trichotomy_Law_for_Real_Numbers/Proof_2
[ "Trichotomy Law for Real Numbers", "Real Numbers", "Inequalities", "Trichotomy Law" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Trichotomy Law (Ordering)" ]
[ "Definition:Total Ordering", "Trichotomy Law (Ordering)" ]
proofwiki-4294
Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Addition
:$\forall a, b, c \in \R: a < b \implies a + c < b + c$
From Real Numbers form Ordered Integral Domain, $\struct {\R, +, \times, \le}$ forms an ordered integral domain. By definition of ordered integral domain, the usual ordering $\le$ is compatible with ring addition. {{Qed}}
:$\forall a, b, c \in \R: a < b \implies a + c < b + c$
From [[Real Numbers form Ordered Integral Domain]], $\struct {\R, +, \times, \le}$ forms an [[Definition:Ordered Integral Domain|ordered integral domain]]. By definition of [[Definition:Ordered Integral Domain|ordered integral domain]], the [[Definition:Usual Ordering|usual ordering]] $\le$ is [[Definition:Relation Co...
Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Number_Ordering_is_Compatible_with_Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Number_Ordering_is_Compatible_with_Addition
[ "Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Addition", "Real Addition", "Inequalities" ]
[]
[ "Real Numbers form Ordered Integral Domain", "Definition:Ordered Integral Domain", "Definition:Ordered Integral Domain", "Definition:Usual Ordering", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)/Addition" ]
proofwiki-4295
Real Number Inequalities can be Added
Let $a, b, c, d \in \R$ such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Then: :$a + c > b + d$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | o = > | r = b | c = {{hypothesis}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a + c | o = > | r = b + c | c = Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Addition }} {{eqn | l = c | o = > | r = d | c = {{hypothesis}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto ...
Let $a, b, c, d \in \R$ such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Then: :$a + c > b + d$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | o = > | r = b | c = {{hypothesis}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a + c | o = > | r = b + c | c = [[Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Addition]] }} {{eqn | l = c | o = > | r = d | c = {{hypothesis}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto ...
Real Number Inequalities can be Added/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Number_Inequalities_can_be_Added
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Number_Inequalities_can_be_Added/Proof_2
[ "Real Number Inequalities can be Added", "Real Numbers", "Addition", "Inequalities" ]
[]
[ "Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Addition", "Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Addition", "Transitive Law" ]
proofwiki-4296
Positive Real Number Inequalities can be Multiplied
Let $a, b, c, d \in \R$ such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Let $b > 0$ and $d > 0$. Then $a c > b d$. If $b < 0$ or $d < 0$ the inequality does not hold.
Note that as $d > 0$ it follows that $c > d > 0$ and so $c > 0$. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | o = > | r = b | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a c | o = > | r = b c | c = Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Multiplication, as $c > 0$ }} {{end-eqn}} {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | ...
Let $a, b, c, d \in \R$ such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Let $b > 0$ and $d > 0$. Then $a c > b d$. If $b < 0$ or $d < 0$ the inequality does not hold.
Note that as $d > 0$ it follows that $c > d > 0$ and so $c > 0$. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | o = > | r = b | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a c | o = > | r = b c | c = [[Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Multiplication]], as $c > 0$ }} {{end-eqn}} {{begin-eqn}} {...
Positive Real Number Inequalities can be Multiplied
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Real_Number_Inequalities_can_be_Multiplied
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Real_Number_Inequalities_can_be_Multiplied
[ "Positive Real Number Inequalities can be Multiplied", "Real Numbers", "Multiplication", "Inequalities" ]
[]
[ "Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Multiplication", "Real Number Ordering is Compatible with Multiplication", "Trichotomy Law for Real Numbers" ]
proofwiki-4297
Positive Real Number Inequalities can be Multiplied
Let $a, b, c, d \in \R$ such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Let $b > 0$ and $d > 0$. Then $a c > b d$. If $b < 0$ or $d < 0$ the inequality does not hold.
Proof by Counterexample: Let $a = c = -1, b = d = -2$. Then $a c = 1$ but $b d = 2$. {{qed}}
Let $a, b, c, d \in \R$ such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Let $b > 0$ and $d > 0$. Then $a c > b d$. If $b < 0$ or $d < 0$ the inequality does not hold.
[[Proof by Counterexample]]: Let $a = c = -1, b = d = -2$. Then $a c = 1$ but $b d = 2$. {{qed}}
Positive Real Number Inequalities can be Multiplied/Disproof for Negative Parameters
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Real_Number_Inequalities_can_be_Multiplied
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Real_Number_Inequalities_can_be_Multiplied/Disproof_for_Negative_Parameters
[ "Positive Real Number Inequalities can be Multiplied", "Real Numbers", "Multiplication", "Inequalities" ]
[]
[ "Proof by Counterexample" ]
proofwiki-4298
Real Ordering is not Compatible with Subtraction
Let $a, b, c, d \in R$ be real numbers such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Then it does not necessarily hold that: :$a - c > b - d$ That is, the usual ordering is not compatible with subtraction.
Proof by Counterexample: For example, set $a = 5, b = 3, c = 4, d = 1$ Then $a - c = 1$ while $b - d = 2$. {{qed}}
Let $a, b, c, d \in R$ be [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]] such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Then it does not necessarily hold that: :$a - c > b - d$ That is, the [[Definition:Usual Ordering|usual ordering]] is not [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with [[Definition:Real Subtraction|s...
[[Proof by Counterexample]]: For example, set $a = 5, b = 3, c = 4, d = 1$ Then $a - c = 1$ while $b - d = 2$. {{qed}}
Real Ordering is not Compatible with Subtraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Ordering_is_not_Compatible_with_Subtraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Ordering_is_not_Compatible_with_Subtraction
[ "Real Subtraction", "Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Usual Ordering", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Subtraction/Real Numbers" ]
[ "Proof by Counterexample" ]
proofwiki-4299
Real Ordering is not Compatible with Division
Let $a, b, c, d \in \R$ be real numbers such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Then it does not necessarily hold that: :$\dfrac a c > \dfrac b d$ That is, the usual ordering is not compatible with division.
Proof by Counterexample: For example, set $a = 5, b = 3, c = 4, d = 1$ Then $\dfrac a c = 1 \frac 1 4$ while $\dfrac b d = 3$. {{qed}}
Let $a, b, c, d \in \R$ be [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]] such that $a > b$ and $c > d$. Then it does not necessarily hold that: :$\dfrac a c > \dfrac b d$ That is, the [[Definition:Usual Ordering|usual ordering]] is not [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with [[Definition:Real Di...
[[Proof by Counterexample]]: For example, set $a = 5, b = 3, c = 4, d = 1$ Then $\dfrac a c = 1 \frac 1 4$ while $\dfrac b d = 3$. {{qed}}
Real Ordering is not Compatible with Division
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Ordering_is_not_Compatible_with_Division
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Ordering_is_not_Compatible_with_Division
[ "Real Division", "Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Usual Ordering", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Division/Field/Real Numbers" ]
[ "Proof by Counterexample" ]