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-5500
Scalar Product with Inverse Unity
:$\paren {-1_R} \circ x = - x$
Follows directly from Scalar Product with Inverse. {{qed}}
:$\paren {-1_R} \circ x = - x$
Follows directly from [[Scalar Product with Inverse]]. {{qed}}
Scalar Product with Inverse Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Inverse_Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Inverse_Unity
[ "Unitary Modules" ]
[]
[ "Scalar Product with Inverse" ]
proofwiki-5501
Scalar Product with Multiple of Unity
:$\paren {n \cdot 1_R} \circ x = n \cdot x$ that is: :$\paren {\map {\paren {+_R}^n} {1_R} } \circ x = \map {\paren {+_G}^n} x$
Follows directly from Scalar Product with Product. {{qed}}
:$\paren {n \cdot 1_R} \circ x = n \cdot x$ that is: :$\paren {\map {\paren {+_R}^n} {1_R} } \circ x = \map {\paren {+_G}^n} x$
Follows directly from [[Scalar Product with Product]]. {{qed}}
Scalar Product with Multiple of Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Multiple_of_Unity
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Product_with_Multiple_of_Unity
[ "Unitary Modules" ]
[]
[ "Scalar Product with Product" ]
proofwiki-5502
Subring Module is Module/Special Case
Let $S$ be a subring of the ring $\struct {R, +, \circ}$. Let $\circ_S$ be the restriction of $\circ$ to $S \times R$. Then $\struct {R, +, \circ_S}_S$ is an $S$-module.
From Ring is Module over Itself, it follows that: :$\struct {R, +, \circ}_R$ is an $R$-module. The result follows directly from Subring Module is Module. {{qed}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Subring|subring]] of the [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]] $\struct {R, +, \circ}$. Let $\circ_S$ be the [[Definition:Restriction of Operation|restriction]] of $\circ$ to $S \times R$. Then $\struct {R, +, \circ_S}_S$ is an [[Definition:Module over Ring|$S$-module]].
From [[Ring is Module over Itself]], it follows that: :$\struct {R, +, \circ}_R$ is an [[Definition:Module over Ring|$R$-module]]. The result follows directly from [[Subring Module is Module]]. {{qed}}
Subring Module is Module/Special Case
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Subring_Module_is_Module/Special_Case
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Subring_Module_is_Module/Special_Case
[ "Subring Module is Module" ]
[ "Definition:Subring", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Restriction/Operation", "Definition:Module over Ring" ]
[ "Ring is Module over Itself", "Definition:Module over Ring", "Subring Module is Module" ]
proofwiki-5503
Trivial Module is Module
Let $\struct {G, +_G}$ be an abelian group whose identity is $e_G$. Let $\struct {R, +_R, \circ_R}$ be a ring. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \ast}_R$ be the trivial $R$-module, such that: :$\forall \lambda \in R: \forall x \in G: \lambda \ast x = e_G$ Then $\struct {G, +_G, \ast}_R$ is a module.
Checking the module axioms in turn: :{{Module-axiom|1}}: $\quad \lambda \circ \paren {x +_G y} = e_G = e_G +_G e_G = \paren {\lambda \circ x} +_G \paren {\lambda \circ y}$ :{{Module-axiom|2}}: $\quad \paren {\lambda +_R \mu} \circ x = e_G = e_G +_G e_G = \paren {\lambda \circ x} +_G \paren {\mu \circ x}$ :{{Module-axio...
Let $\struct {G, +_G}$ be an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian group]] whose [[Definition:Identity Element|identity]] is $e_G$. Let $\struct {R, +_R, \circ_R}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \ast}_R$ be the [[Definition:Trivial Module|trivial $R$-module]], such that: :$\for...
Checking the [[Axiom:Module Axioms|module axioms]] in turn: :{{Module-axiom|1}}: $\quad \lambda \circ \paren {x +_G y} = e_G = e_G +_G e_G = \paren {\lambda \circ x} +_G \paren {\lambda \circ y}$ :{{Module-axiom|2}}: $\quad \paren {\lambda +_R \mu} \circ x = e_G = e_G +_G e_G = \paren {\lambda \circ x} +_G \paren {\m...
Trivial Module is Module
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trivial_Module_is_Module
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trivial_Module_is_Module
[ "Module Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Abelian Group", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Trivial Module", "Definition:Module over Ring" ]
[ "Axiom:Left Module Axioms", "Definition:Trivial Module", "Definition:Module over Ring" ]
proofwiki-5504
Trivial Module is Not Unitary
Let $\struct {G, +_G}$ be an abelian group whose identity is $e_G$. Let $\struct {R, +_R, \circ_R}$ be a ring. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \circ}_R$ be the trivial $R$-module, such that: :$\forall \lambda \in R: \forall x \in G: \lambda \circ x = e_G$ Then unless $R$ is a ring with unity and $G$ contains only one element, th...
By definition, for a trivial module to be unitary, $R$ needs to be a ring with unity. For {{Module-axiom|4}} to apply, we require that: :$\forall x \in G: 1_R \circ x = x$ But for the trivial module: :$\forall x \in G: 1_R \circ x = e_G$ So {{Module-axiom|4}} can apply only when: :$\forall x \in G: x = e_G$ Thus for th...
Let $\struct {G, +_G}$ be an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian group]] whose [[Definition:Identity Element|identity]] is $e_G$. Let $\struct {R, +_R, \circ_R}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \circ}_R$ be the [[Definition:Trivial Module|trivial $R$-module]], such that: :$\fo...
By definition, for a [[Definition:Trivial Module|trivial module]] to be [[Definition:Unitary Module|unitary]], $R$ needs to be a [[Definition:Ring with Unity|ring with unity]]. For {{Module-axiom|4}} to apply, we require that: :$\forall x \in G: 1_R \circ x = x$ But for the trivial module: :$\forall x \in G: 1_R \ci...
Trivial Module is Not Unitary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trivial_Module_is_Not_Unitary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trivial_Module_is_Not_Unitary
[ "Module Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Abelian Group", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Trivial Module", "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Unitary Module over Ring" ]
[ "Definition:Trivial Module", "Definition:Unitary Module over Ring", "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Unitary Module over Ring", "Definition:Trivial Group" ]
proofwiki-5505
Null Module is Module
Let $\struct {R, +_R, \circ_R}$ be a ring. Let $G$ be the trivial group. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \ast}_R$ be the null module. Then $\struct {G, +_G, \ast}_R$ is a module.
Follows from the fact that $\struct {G, +_G, \ast}_R$ has to be, by definition, a trivial module: $\ast$ can only be defined as: :$\forall \lambda \in R: \forall x \in G: \lambda \ast x = e_G$ The result then follows from Trivial Module is Module. {{qed}} Category:Module Theory 0tlsqipf6e4cnq5oqkgv0z0ay7pjtty
Let $\struct {R, +_R, \circ_R}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Let $G$ be the [[Definition:Trivial Group|trivial group]]. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \ast}_R$ be the [[Definition:Null Module|null module]]. Then $\struct {G, +_G, \ast}_R$ is a [[Definition:Module over Ring|module]].
Follows from the fact that $\struct {G, +_G, \ast}_R$ has to be, by definition, a [[Definition:Trivial Module|trivial module]]: $\ast$ can only be defined as: :$\forall \lambda \in R: \forall x \in G: \lambda \ast x = e_G$ The result then follows from [[Trivial Module is Module]]. {{qed}} [[Category:Module Theory]] ...
Null Module is Module
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Null_Module_is_Module
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Null_Module_is_Module
[ "Module Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Trivial Group", "Definition:Null Module", "Definition:Module over Ring" ]
[ "Definition:Trivial Module", "Trivial Module is Module", "Category:Module Theory" ]
proofwiki-5506
Condition on Equality of Generated Sigma-Algebras
Let $X$ be a set. Let $\GG$, $\HH$ be sets of subsets of $X$. Suppose that: :$\GG \subseteq \HH \subseteq \map \sigma \GG$ where $\sigma$ denotes generated $\sigma$-algebra. Then: :$\map \sigma \GG = \map \sigma \HH$
From Generated Sigma-Algebra Preserves Subset, it follows that: :$\map \sigma \GG \subseteq \map \sigma \HH$ Since $\map \sigma \GG$ is a $\sigma$-algebra containing $\HH$: :$\map \sigma \HH \subseteq \map \sigma \GG$ from the definition of generated $\sigma$-algebra. Hence the result, from the definition of set equali...
Let $X$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\GG$, $\HH$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]] of [[Definition:Subset|subsets]] of $X$. Suppose that: :$\GG \subseteq \HH \subseteq \map \sigma \GG$ where $\sigma$ denotes [[Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets|generated $\sigma$-algebra]]. Then: :$\map \...
From [[Generated Sigma-Algebra Preserves Subset]], it follows that: :$\map \sigma \GG \subseteq \map \sigma \HH$ Since $\map \sigma \GG$ is a [[Definition:Sigma-Algebra|$\sigma$-algebra]] containing $\HH$: :$\map \sigma \HH \subseteq \map \sigma \GG$ from the definition of [[Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by C...
Condition on Equality of Generated Sigma-Algebras
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Condition_on_Equality_of_Generated_Sigma-Algebras
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Condition_on_Equality_of_Generated_Sigma-Algebras
[ "Sigma-Algebras", "Sigma-Algebras Generated by Collection of Subsets", "Sigma-Algebras Generated by Collection of Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets" ]
[ "Generated Sigma-Algebra Preserves Subset", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets", "Definition:Set Equality", "Category:Sigma-Algebras Generated by Collection of Subsets" ]
proofwiki-5507
Sigma-Algebra is Monotone Class
Let $\Sigma$ be a $\sigma$-algebra on a set $X$. Then $\Sigma$ is also a monotone class.
By definition, $\Sigma$, being a $\sigma$-algebra, is closed under countable unions. From Sigma-Algebra Closed under Countable Intersection, it is also closed under countable intersections. Thence, by definition, $\Sigma$ is a monotone class. {{qed}} Category:Sigma-Algebras Category:Monotone Classes fzkm77bth2qkus1e99u...
Let $\Sigma$ be a [[Definition:Sigma-Algebra|$\sigma$-algebra]] on a [[Definition:Set|set]] $X$. Then $\Sigma$ is also a [[Definition:Monotone Class|monotone class]].
By definition, $\Sigma$, being a [[Definition:Sigma-Algebra|$\sigma$-algebra]], is [[Definition:Closed Algebraic Structure|closed]] under [[Definition:Countable Union|countable unions]]. From [[Sigma-Algebra Closed under Countable Intersection]], it is also [[Definition:Closed Algebraic Structure|closed]] under [[Defi...
Sigma-Algebra is Monotone Class
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sigma-Algebra_is_Monotone_Class
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sigma-Algebra_is_Monotone_Class
[ "Sigma-Algebras", "Monotone Classes" ]
[ "Definition:Sigma-Algebra", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Monotone Class" ]
[ "Definition:Sigma-Algebra", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Set Union/Countable Union", "Sigma-Algebra Closed under Countable Intersection", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Set Intersection/Countable Intersection", "Defini...
proofwiki-5508
Linear Combination of Sequence is Linear Combination of Set
Let $G$ be an $R$-module. Let $\sequence {a_k}_{1 \mathop \le k \mathop \le n}$ be a sequence of elements of $G$. Let $b$ be an element of $G$. Then: :$b$ is a linear combination of the sequence $\sequence {a_k}_{1 \mathop \le k \mathop \le n}$ {{iff}}: :$b$ is a linear combination of the set $\set {a_k: 1 \mathop \le ...
=== Necessary Condition === By definition of linear combination of subset: :Every linear combination of $\sequence {a_k}_{1 \mathop \le k \mathop \le n}$ is a linear combination of $\set {a_k: 1 \mathop \le k \mathop \le n}$. {{qed|lemma}}
Let $G$ be an [[Definition:Module over Ring|$R$-module]]. Let $\sequence {a_k}_{1 \mathop \le k \mathop \le n}$ be a [[Definition:Sequence|sequence of elements]] of $G$. Let $b$ be an [[Definition:Element|element]] of $G$. Then: :$b$ is a [[Definition:Linear Combination of Sequence|linear combination]] of the [[Def...
=== Necessary Condition === By definition of [[Definition:Linear Combination of Subset|linear combination of subset]]: :Every [[Definition:Linear Combination of Sequence|linear combination]] of $\sequence {a_k}_{1 \mathop \le k \mathop \le n}$ is a [[Definition:Linear Combination of Subset|linear combination]] of $\s...
Linear Combination of Sequence is Linear Combination of Set
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Linear_Combination_of_Sequence_is_Linear_Combination_of_Set
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Linear_Combination_of_Sequence_is_Linear_Combination_of_Set
[ "Linear Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Module over Ring", "Definition:Sequence", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Linear Combination/Sequence", "Definition:Finite Sequence", "Definition:Linear Combination/Subset", "Definition:Set" ]
[ "Definition:Linear Combination/Subset", "Definition:Linear Combination/Sequence", "Definition:Linear Combination/Subset", "Definition:Linear Combination/Subset", "Definition:Linear Combination/Sequence", "Definition:Linear Combination/Subset" ]
proofwiki-5509
Trace Sigma-Algebra of Generated Sigma-Algebra
Let $X$ be a Set, and let $\GG \subseteq \powerset X$ be a collection of subsets of $X$. Let $A \subseteq X$ be a subset of $X$. Then the following equality holds: :$A \cap \map \sigma \GG = \map \sigma {A \cap \GG}$ where :$\map \sigma \GG$ denotes the smallest $\sigma$-algebra on $X$ that contains $\GG$ :$\map \sigma...
By definition of generated $\sigma$-algebra: :$\GG \subseteq \map \sigma \GG$ whence from Set Intersection Preserves Subsets: :$A \cap \GG \subseteq A \cap \map \sigma \GG$ and therefore, by definition of generated $\sigma$-algebra: :$\map \sigma {A \cap \GG} \subseteq A \cap \map \sigma \GG$ For the reverse inclusion,...
Let $X$ be a [[Definition:Set|Set]], and let $\GG \subseteq \powerset X$ be a collection of [[Definition:Subset|subsets]] of $X$. Let $A \subseteq X$ be a [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $X$. Then the following equality holds: :$A \cap \map \sigma \GG = \map \sigma {A \cap \GG}$ where :$\map \sigma \GG$ denotes t...
By definition of [[Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets|generated $\sigma$-algebra]]: :$\GG \subseteq \map \sigma \GG$ whence from [[Set Intersection Preserves Subsets]]: :$A \cap \GG \subseteq A \cap \map \sigma \GG$ and therefore, by definition of [[Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Col...
Trace Sigma-Algebra of Generated Sigma-Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trace_Sigma-Algebra_of_Generated_Sigma-Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trace_Sigma-Algebra_of_Generated_Sigma-Algebra
[ "Sigma-Algebras", "Sigma-Algebras Generated by Collection of Subsets", "Trace Sigma-Algebras", "Sigma-Algebras Generated by Collection of Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets", "Definition:Trace Sigma-Algebra" ]
[ "Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets", "Set Intersection Preserves Subsets", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra", "Set Intersection Distributes over Set Difference", "Intersection with Subset is Subset", "Definition:Sigma-Alge...
proofwiki-5510
Intersection is Subset/General Result
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\powerset S$ be the power set of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \forall T \in \mathbb S: \bigcap \mathbb S \subseteq T$ === Family of Sets === In the context of a family of sets, the result can be presented as follows: {{:Intersection is Subset/Family of Sets}}
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x | o = \in | r = \bigcap \mathbb S | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall T \in \mathbb S | l = x | o = \in | r = T | c = {{Defof|Set Intersection}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall T \in \mathbb S | l = \bigcap \mathbb S ...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\powerset S$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \forall T \in \mathbb S: \bigcap \mathbb S \subseteq T$ === [[Intersection is Subset/Family of Sets|Family of Sets]] === In the context of a [[Definition:Ind...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x | o = \in | r = \bigcap \mathbb S | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall T \in \mathbb S | l = x | o = \in | r = T | c = {{Defof|Set Intersection}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall T \in \mathbb S | l = \bigcap \mathbb S ...
Intersection is Subset/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_is_Subset/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_is_Subset/General_Result
[ "Set Intersection", "Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Power Set", "Intersection is Subset/Family of Sets", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family of Subsets" ]
[ "Category:Set Intersection", "Category:Subsets" ]
proofwiki-5511
Union of Relative Complements of Nested Subsets
Let $R \subseteq S \subseteq T$ be sets with the indicated inclusions. Then: :$\relcomp T S \cup \relcomp S R = \relcomp T R$ where $\complement$ denotes relative complement. Phrased via Set Difference as Intersection with Relative Complement: :$\paren {T \setminus S} \cup \paren {S \setminus R} = T \setminus R$ where ...
From Union with Set Difference: :$T = T \setminus S \cup S$ and therefore by Set Difference is Right Distributive over Union: :$T \setminus R = \paren {\paren {T \setminus S} \setminus R} \cup \paren {S \setminus R}$ Now, by Set Difference with Union and Union with Superset is Superset: :$\paren {T \setminus S} \setmin...
Let $R \subseteq S \subseteq T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]] with the indicated [[Definition:Subset|inclusions]]. Then: :$\relcomp T S \cup \relcomp S R = \relcomp T R$ where $\complement$ denotes [[Definition:Relative Complement|relative complement]]. Phrased via [[Set Difference as Intersection with Relative Comp...
From [[Union with Set Difference]]: :$T = T \setminus S \cup S$ and therefore by [[Set Difference is Right Distributive over Union]]: :$T \setminus R = \paren {\paren {T \setminus S} \setminus R} \cup \paren {S \setminus R}$ Now, by [[Set Difference with Union]] and [[Union with Superset is Superset]]: :$\paren {T...
Union of Relative Complements of Nested Subsets
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Relative_Complements_of_Nested_Subsets
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Relative_Complements_of_Nested_Subsets
[ "Relative Complement", "Set Union" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Relative Complement", "Set Difference as Intersection with Relative Complement", "Definition:Set Difference" ]
[ "Union with Set Difference", "Set Difference is Right Distributive over Union", "Set Difference with Union", "Union with Superset is Superset" ]
proofwiki-5512
Homomorphic Image of R-Module is R-Module
Let $\struct {R, +_R, \times_R}$ be a ring. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \circ_G}_R$ be an $R$-module. Let $\struct {H, +_H, \circ_H}_R$ be an $R$-algebraic structure. Let $\phi: G \to H$ be a homomorphism. Then the homomorphic image of $\phi$ is an $R$-module.
Let us write $\phi \sqbrk G$ to denote the homomorphic image of $\phi$. From Image of Group Homomorphism is Subgroup, $\phi \sqbrk G$ is a subgroup of $\struct {H, +_H}$. For any $\map \phi g$ and $\map \phi {g'}$ in $\phi \sqbrk G$, we have: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \phi g +_H \map \phi {g'} | r = \map \ph...
Let $\struct {R, +_R, \times_R}$ be a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Let $\struct {G, +_G, \circ_G}_R$ be an [[Definition:Module over Ring|$R$-module]]. Let $\struct {H, +_H, \circ_H}_R$ be an [[Definition:R-Algebraic Structure|$R$-algebraic structure]]. Let $\phi: G \to H$ be a [[Definition:R-Algebrai...
Let us write $\phi \sqbrk G$ to denote the [[Definition:Homomorphic Image|homomorphic image]] of $\phi$. From [[Image of Group Homomorphism is Subgroup]], $\phi \sqbrk G$ is a [[Definition:Subgroup|subgroup]] of $\struct {H, +_H}$. For any $\map \phi g$ and $\map \phi {g'}$ in $\phi \sqbrk G$, we have: {{begin-eqn}}...
Homomorphic Image of R-Module is R-Module
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Homomorphic_Image_of_R-Module_is_R-Module
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Homomorphic_Image_of_R-Module_is_R-Module
[ "Module Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Module over Ring", "Definition:R-Algebraic Structure", "Definition:R-Algebraic Structure Homomorphism", "Definition:Homomorphism (Abstract Algebra)/Image", "Definition:Module over Ring" ]
[ "Definition:Homomorphism (Abstract Algebra)/Image", "Image of Group Homomorphism is Subgroup", "Definition:Subgroup", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Definition:Module over Ring", "Axiom:Left Module Axioms", "Definition:Module over Ring", "Definition:Module over Ring", "Definition:Module over Ring", ...
proofwiki-5513
Evaluation Linear Transformation is Linear Transformation
Let $R$ be a commutative ring with unity. Let $G$ be an $R$-module. Let $G^*$ be the algebraic dual of $G$. Let $G^{**}$ be the double dual of $G^*$. Let the mapping $J: G \to G^{**}$ be the evaluation linear transformation from $G$ into $G^{**}$ defined as: :$\forall x \in G: \map J x = x^\wedge$ where for each $x \in...
From Underlying Mapping of Evaluation Linear Transformation is Element of Double Dual, we have that: :$x^\wedge \in G^{**}$ Hence $x^\wedge$ a fortiori is a linear transformation. It remains to be shown that $J: G \to G^{**}$ is a linear transformation. That is, that the following conditions are satisfied by $J$: :$(1)...
Let $R$ be a [[Definition:Commutative Ring with Unity|commutative ring with unity]]. Let $G$ be an [[Definition:Module over Ring|$R$-module]]. Let $G^*$ be the [[Definition:Algebraic Dual|algebraic dual]] of $G$. Let $G^{**}$ be the [[Definition:Double Dual|double dual]] of $G^*$. Let the [[Definition:Mapping|mapp...
From [[Underlying Mapping of Evaluation Linear Transformation is Element of Double Dual]], we have that: :$x^\wedge \in G^{**}$ Hence $x^\wedge$ [[Definition:A Fortiori|a fortiori]] is a [[Definition:Linear Transformation|linear transformation]]. It remains to be shown that $J: G \to G^{**}$ is a [[Definition:Linea...
Evaluation Linear Transformation is Linear Transformation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Evaluation_Linear_Transformation_is_Linear_Transformation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Evaluation_Linear_Transformation_is_Linear_Transformation
[ "Linear Transformations", "Evaluation Linear Transformations (Module Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Commutative and Unitary Ring", "Definition:Module over Ring", "Definition:Algebraic Dual", "Definition:Algebraic Dual/Double Dual", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Evaluation Linear Transformation/Module Theory", "Definition:Linear Transformation" ]
[ "Underlying Mapping of Evaluation Linear Transformation is Element of Double Dual", "Definition:A Fortiori", "Definition:Linear Transformation", "Definition:Linear Transformation" ]
proofwiki-5514
Evaluation Isomorphism is Isomorphism
Let $R$ be a commutative ring with unity. Let $G$ be a unitary $R$-module whose dimension is finite. Then the evaluation linear transformation $J: G \to G^{**}$ is an isomorphism.
Let $\sequence {a_n}$ be an ordered basis of $G$. Then by definition, every $x \in G$ can be written in the form: :$\ds \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^n \lambda_k a_k$ where $\lambda_k \in R$. From Unique Representation by Ordered Basis, this representation is unique. From Existence of Ordered Dual Basis: :$\sequence {\map J {a_...
Let $R$ be a [[Definition:Commutative Ring with Unity|commutative ring with unity]]. Let $G$ be a [[Definition:Unitary Module|unitary $R$-module]] whose [[Definition:Dimension of Module|dimension]] is [[Definition:Finite|finite]]. Then the [[Definition:Evaluation Linear Transformation/Module Theory|evaluation linear...
Let $\sequence {a_n}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Basis|ordered basis]] of $G$. Then by definition, every $x \in G$ can be written in the form: :$\ds \sum_{k \mathop = 1}^n \lambda_k a_k$ where $\lambda_k \in R$. From [[Unique Representation by Ordered Basis]], this representation is [[Definition:Unique|unique]]. Fro...
Evaluation Isomorphism is Isomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Evaluation_Isomorphism_is_Isomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Evaluation_Isomorphism_is_Isomorphism
[ "Linear Transformations", "Module Isomorphisms", "Evaluation Linear Transformations (Module Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Commutative and Unitary Ring", "Definition:Unitary Module over Ring", "Definition:Dimension of Module", "Definition:Finite", "Definition:Evaluation Linear Transformation/Module Theory", "Definition:Isomorphism (Abstract Algebra)/R-Algebraic Structure Isomorphism/Module Isomorphism" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Basis", "Unique Representation by Ordered Basis", "Definition:Unique", "Existence of Ordered Dual Basis", "Definition:Ordered Dual Basis", "Definition:Ordered Basis", "Definition:Ordered Dual Basis", "Unique Linear Transformation Between Modules", "Definition:Unique", "Definiti...
proofwiki-5515
Conditions for Homogeneity/Straight Line
The line $L = \alpha_1 x_1 + \alpha_2 x_2 = \beta$ is homogeneous {{iff}} $\beta = 0$.
=== Sufficient Condition === Let the line $L = \alpha_1 x_1 + \alpha_2 x_2 = \beta$ be homogeneous. Then the origin $\tuple {0, 0}$ lies on $L$. Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \alpha_1 0 + \alpha_2 0 | r = \beta | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \beta | r = 0 | c = }} {{end-eqn}} {{q...
The [[Equation of Straight Line in Plane|line]] $L = \alpha_1 x_1 + \alpha_2 x_2 = \beta$ is [[Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)|homogeneous]] {{iff}} $\beta = 0$.
=== Sufficient Condition === Let the [[Definition:Straight Line|line]] $L = \alpha_1 x_1 + \alpha_2 x_2 = \beta$ be [[Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)|homogeneous]]. Then the [[Definition:Origin|origin]] $\tuple {0, 0}$ lies on $L$. Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \alpha_1 0 + \alpha_2 0 | r = \bet...
Conditions for Homogeneity/Straight Line
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conditions_for_Homogeneity/Straight_Line
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conditions_for_Homogeneity/Straight_Line
[ "Linear Algebra", "Analytic Geometry" ]
[ "Equation of Straight Line in Plane", "Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)" ]
[ "Definition:Line/Straight Line", "Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)", "Definition:Coordinate System/Origin", "Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)" ]
proofwiki-5516
Conditions for Homogeneity/Plane
The plane $P = \alpha_1 x_1 + \alpha_2 x_2 + \alpha_3 x_3 = \gamma$ is homogeneous {{iff}} $\gamma = 0$.
=== Sufficient Condition === Let the plane $P = \alpha_1 x_1 + \alpha_2 x_2 + \alpha_3 x_3 = \gamma$ be homogeneous. Then the origin $\tuple {0, 0, 0}$ lies on $P$. Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \alpha_1 0 + \alpha_2 0 + \alpha_3 0 | r = \gamma | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \gamma | r ...
The [[Equation of Plane|plane]] $P = \alpha_1 x_1 + \alpha_2 x_2 + \alpha_3 x_3 = \gamma$ is [[Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)|homogeneous]] {{iff}} $\gamma = 0$.
=== Sufficient Condition === Let the plane $P = \alpha_1 x_1 + \alpha_2 x_2 + \alpha_3 x_3 = \gamma$ be [[Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)|homogeneous]]. Then the [[Definition:Origin|origin]] $\tuple {0, 0, 0}$ lies on $P$. Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \alpha_1 0 + \alpha_2 0 + \alpha_3 0 | r = ...
Conditions for Homogeneity/Plane
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conditions_for_Homogeneity/Plane
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conditions_for_Homogeneity/Plane
[ "Linear Algebra", "Solid Analytic Geometry" ]
[ "Equation of Plane", "Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)" ]
[ "Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)", "Definition:Coordinate System/Origin", "Definition:Homogeneous (Analytic Geometry)" ]
proofwiki-5517
Zero Matrix is Identity for Hadamard Product
Let $\struct {S, \cdot}$ be a monoid whose identity is $e$. Let $\map {\MM_S} {m, n}$ be an $m \times n$ matrix space over $S$. Let $\mathbf e = \sqbrk e_{m n}$ be the zero matrix of $\map {\MM_S} {m, n}$. Then $\mathbf e$ is the identity element for Hadamard product.
Let $\mathbf A = \sqbrk a_{m n} \in \map {\MM_S} {m, n}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \mathbf A \circ \mathbf e | r = \sqbrk a_{m n} \circ \sqbrk e_{m n} | c = Definition of $\mathbf A$ and $\mathbf e$ }} {{eqn | r = \sqbrk {a \cdot e}_{m n} | c = {{Defof|Hadamard Product}} }} {{eqn | r = \sqbrk a...
Let $\struct {S, \cdot}$ be a [[Definition:Monoid|monoid]] whose [[Definition:Identity Element|identity]] is $e$. Let $\map {\MM_S} {m, n}$ be an [[Definition:Matrix Space|$m \times n$ matrix space]] over $S$. Let $\mathbf e = \sqbrk e_{m n}$ be the [[Definition:Zero Matrix over General Monoid|zero matrix]] of $\map ...
Let $\mathbf A = \sqbrk a_{m n} \in \map {\MM_S} {m, n}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \mathbf A \circ \mathbf e | r = \sqbrk a_{m n} \circ \sqbrk e_{m n} | c = Definition of $\mathbf A$ and $\mathbf e$ }} {{eqn | r = \sqbrk {a \cdot e}_{m n} | c = {{Defof|Hadamard Product}} }} {{eqn | r = \sqbrk...
Zero Matrix is Identity for Hadamard Product
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Zero_Matrix_is_Identity_for_Hadamard_Product
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Zero_Matrix_is_Identity_for_Hadamard_Product
[ "Hadamard Product", "Zero Matrix" ]
[ "Definition:Monoid", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Matrix Space", "Definition:Zero Matrix/General Monoid", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Hadamard Product" ]
[]
proofwiki-5518
Sum of Ideals is Ideal/General Result
Let $J_1, J_2, \ldots, J_n$ be ideals of a ring $\struct {R, +, \circ}$. Then: :$J = J_1 + J_2 + \cdots + J_n$ is an ideal of $R$. where $J_1 + J_2 + \cdots + J_n$ is as defined in subset product with respect to $\struct{R, +}$.
Let $J_1, J_2, \ldots, J_n$ be ideals of a ring $\struct {R, +, \circ}$. Proof by induction: For all $n \in \N_{>0}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :$J_1 + J_2 + \cdots + J_n$ is an ideal of $R$. $\map P 1$ is true, as this just says $J_1$ is an ideal of $R$.
Let $J_1, J_2, \ldots, J_n$ be [[Definition:Ideal of Ring|ideals]] of a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]] $\struct {R, +, \circ}$. Then: :$J = J_1 + J_2 + \cdots + J_n$ is an [[Definition:Ideal of Ring|ideal]] of $R$. where $J_1 + J_2 + \cdots + J_n$ is as defined in [[Definition:Subset Product|subset produ...
Let $J_1, J_2, \ldots, J_n$ be [[Definition:Ideal of Ring|ideals]] of a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]] $\struct {R, +, \circ}$. Proof by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]]: For all $n \in \N_{>0}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$J_1 + J_2 + \cdots + J_n$ i...
Sum of Ideals is Ideal/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sum_of_Ideals_is_Ideal/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sum_of_Ideals_is_Ideal/General_Result
[ "Ideal Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Ideal of Ring", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ideal of Ring", "Definition:Subset Product" ]
[ "Definition:Ideal of Ring", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Proposition", "Definition:Ideal of Ring", "Definition:Ideal of Ring", "Definition:Ideal of Ring", "Definition:Ideal of Ring", "Definition:Ideal of Ring", "Definition:Ideal of Ring",...
proofwiki-5519
Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes
Let $n$ be an integer such that $n > 1$. Then $n$ can be expressed as the product of one or more primes.
{{AimForCont}} this supposition is false. Let $m$ be the smallest integer which can not be expressed as the product of primes. As a prime number is trivially a product of primes, $m$ can not itself be prime. Hence: :$\exists r, s \in \Z: 1 < r < m, 1 < s < m: m = r s$ As $m$ is our least counterexample, both $r$ and $s...
Let $n$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]] such that $n > 1$. Then $n$ can be expressed as the [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|product]] of one or more [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]].
{{AimForCont}} this supposition is false. Let $m$ be the smallest [[Definition:Integer|integer]] which can not be expressed as the [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|product]] of [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]]. As a [[Definition:Prime Number|prime number]] is trivially a [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|produ...
Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integer_is_Expressible_as_Product_of_Primes
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integer_is_Expressible_as_Product_of_Primes/Proof_1
[ "Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes", "Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic", "Prime Decompositions", "Prime Numbers", "Factorization" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Prime Number" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Number", "Principle of Least Counterexample", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Prime...
proofwiki-5520
Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes
Let $n$ be an integer such that $n > 1$. Then $n$ can be expressed as the product of one or more primes.
If $n$ is prime, the result is immediate. Let $n$ be composite. Then by Composite Number has Two Divisors Less Than It: :$\exists r, s \in \Z: n = r s, 1 < r < n, 1 < s < n$ This being the case, the set $S_1 = \set {d: d \divides n, 1 < d < n}$ is nonempty, and bounded below by $1$. By Set of Integers Bounded Below by ...
Let $n$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]] such that $n > 1$. Then $n$ can be expressed as the [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|product]] of one or more [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]].
If $n$ is [[Definition:Prime Number|prime]], the result is immediate. Let $n$ be [[Definition:Composite Number|composite]]. Then by [[Composite Number has Two Divisors Less Than It]]: :$\exists r, s \in \Z: n = r s, 1 < r < n, 1 < s < n$ This being the case, the set $S_1 = \set {d: d \divides n, 1 < d < n}$ is [[De...
Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integer_is_Expressible_as_Product_of_Primes
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integer_is_Expressible_as_Product_of_Primes/Proof_2
[ "Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes", "Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic", "Prime Decompositions", "Prime Numbers", "Factorization" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Prime Number" ]
[ "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Composite Number", "Composite Number has Two Divisors Less Than It", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:Bounded Below Set", "Set of Integers Bounded Below by Integer has Smallest Element", "Definition:Smallest Element", "Definition:Composite Number", "Comp...
proofwiki-5521
Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes
Let $n$ be an integer such that $n > 1$. Then $n$ can be expressed as the product of one or more primes.
The proof proceeds by induction. For all $n \in \N_{> 1}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :$n$ can be expressed as a product of prime numbers. First note that if $n$ is prime, the result is immediate. === Basis for the Induction === $\map P 2$ is the case: :$n$ can be expressed as a product of prime numbers. As $2$...
Let $n$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]] such that $n > 1$. Then $n$ can be expressed as the [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|product]] of one or more [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]].
The proof proceeds by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]]. For all $n \in \N_{> 1}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$n$ can be expressed as a product of [[Definition:Prime Number|prime numbers]]. First note that if $n$ is [[Definition:Prime Number|prime]], the result is ...
Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes/Proof 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integer_is_Expressible_as_Product_of_Primes
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integer_is_Expressible_as_Product_of_Primes/Proof_3
[ "Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes", "Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic", "Prime Decompositions", "Prime Numbers", "Factorization" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Prime Number" ]
[ "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Proposition", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Number", "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Nu...
proofwiki-5522
Expression for Integer as Product of Primes is Unique
Let $n$ be an integer such that $n > 1$. Then the expression for $n$ as the product of one or more primes is unique up to the order in which they appear.
{{AimForCont}} the supposition false. That is, suppose there is at least one positive integer that can be expressed in more than one way as a product of primes. Let the smallest of these be $m$. Thus: :$m = p_1 p_2 \cdots p_r = q_1 q_2 \cdots q_s$ where all of $p_1, \ldots p_r, q_1, \ldots q_s$ are prime. By definition...
Let $n$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]] such that $n > 1$. Then the expression for $n$ as the [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|product]] of one or more [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]] is [[Definition:Unique|unique]] up to the order in which they appear.
{{AimForCont}} the supposition false. That is, suppose there is at least one [[Definition:Positive Integer|positive integer]] that can be expressed in more than one way as a product of [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]]. Let the smallest of these be $m$. Thus: :$m = p_1 p_2 \cdots p_r = q_1 q_2 \cdots q_s$ where all...
Expression for Integer as Product of Primes is Unique/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Expression_for_Integer_as_Product_of_Primes_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Expression_for_Integer_as_Product_of_Primes_is_Unique/Proof_1
[ "Expression for Integer as Product of Primes is Unique", "Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic", "Prime Decompositions", "Prime Numbers", "Factorization" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Unique" ]
[ "Definition:Positive/Integer", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Positive/Integer", "Definition:Positive/Integer", "Prime not Divisor implies Coprime", "Definition:Divisor (Algebra)/Integer", "Euclid's Lemma for ...
proofwiki-5523
Expression for Integer as Product of Primes is Unique
Let $n$ be an integer such that $n > 1$. Then the expression for $n$ as the product of one or more primes is unique up to the order in which they appear.
{{AimForCont}} $n$ has two prime factorizations: :$n = p_1 p_2 \dots p_r = q_1 q_2 \dots q_s$ where $r \le s$ and each $p_i$ and $q_j$ is prime with $p_1 \le p_2 \le \dots \le p_r$ and $q_1 \le q_2 \le \dots \le q_s$. Since $p_1 \divides q_1 q_2 \dots q_s$, it follows from Euclid's Lemma for Prime Divisors that $p_1 =...
Let $n$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]] such that $n > 1$. Then the expression for $n$ as the [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|product]] of one or more [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]] is [[Definition:Unique|unique]] up to the order in which they appear.
{{AimForCont}} $n$ has two [[Definition:Prime Decomposition|prime factorizations]]: :$n = p_1 p_2 \dots p_r = q_1 q_2 \dots q_s$ where $r \le s$ and each $p_i$ and $q_j$ is prime with $p_1 \le p_2 \le \dots \le p_r$ and $q_1 \le q_2 \le \dots \le q_s$. Since $p_1 \divides q_1 q_2 \dots q_s$, it follows from [[Euclid'...
Expression for Integer as Product of Primes is Unique/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Expression_for_Integer_as_Product_of_Primes_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Expression_for_Integer_as_Product_of_Primes_is_Unique/Proof_2
[ "Expression for Integer as Product of Primes is Unique", "Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic", "Prime Decompositions", "Prime Numbers", "Factorization" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Unique" ]
[ "Definition:Prime Decomposition", "Euclid's Lemma for Prime Divisors", "Euclid's Lemma for Prime Divisors", "Definition:Common Divisor/Integers", "Definition:Common Divisor/Integers", "Divisors of One", "Definition:Divisor (Algebra)/Integer", "Definition:Prime Number", "Proof by Contradiction", "D...
proofwiki-5524
Expression for Integer as Product of Primes is Unique
Let $n$ be an integer such that $n > 1$. Then the expression for $n$ as the product of one or more primes is unique up to the order in which they appear.
The proof proceeds by strong induction. For all $n \in \Z_{\ge 2}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :the prime decomposition for $n$ is unique up to order of presentation. Note that it has been established in Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes that $n$ does in fact have at least $1$ prime decomposition. ===...
Let $n$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]] such that $n > 1$. Then the expression for $n$ as the [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|product]] of one or more [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]] is [[Definition:Unique|unique]] up to the order in which they appear.
The proof proceeds by [[Second Principle of Mathematical Induction|strong induction]]. For all $n \in \Z_{\ge 2}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :the [[Definition:Prime Decomposition|prime decomposition]] for $n$ is [[Definition:Unique|unique]] up to order of presentation. Note that i...
Expression for Integer as Product of Primes is Unique/Proof 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Expression_for_Integer_as_Product_of_Primes_is_Unique
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Expression_for_Integer_as_Product_of_Primes_is_Unique/Proof_3
[ "Expression for Integer as Product of Primes is Unique", "Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic", "Prime Decompositions", "Prime Numbers", "Factorization" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Unique" ]
[ "Second Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Proposition", "Definition:Prime Decomposition", "Definition:Unique", "Integer is Expressible as Product of Primes", "Definition:Prime Decomposition", "Second Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Second Principle of Mathematical Induction", ...
proofwiki-5525
Modulo Addition is Closed/Integers
Let $m \in \Z$ be an integer. Then addition modulo $m$ on the set of integers modulo $m$ is closed: :$\forall \eqclass x m, \eqclass y m \in \Z_m: \eqclass x m +_m \eqclass y m \in \Z_m$.
From the definition of addition modulo $m$, we have: :$\eqclass x m +_m \eqclass y m = \eqclass {x + y} m$ By the Division Theorem: :$x + y = q m + r$ where $0 \le r < m$ Therefore for all $0 \le r < m$: :$\eqclass {x + y} m = \eqclass r m$. Therefore from the definition of integers modulo $m$: :$\eqclass {x + y} m \in...
Let $m \in \Z$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]]. Then [[Definition:Modulo Addition|addition modulo $m$]] on the [[Definition:Integers Modulo m|set of integers modulo $m$]] is [[Definition:Closed Algebraic Structure|closed]]: :$\forall \eqclass x m, \eqclass y m \in \Z_m: \eqclass x m +_m \eqclass y m \in \Z_m$.
From the definition of [[Definition:Modulo Addition|addition modulo $m$]], we have: :$\eqclass x m +_m \eqclass y m = \eqclass {x + y} m$ By the [[Division Theorem]]: :$x + y = q m + r$ where $0 \le r < m$ Therefore for all $0 \le r < m$: :$\eqclass {x + y} m = \eqclass r m$. Therefore from the definition of [[Defin...
Modulo Addition is Closed/Integers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Modulo_Addition_is_Closed/Integers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Modulo_Addition_is_Closed/Integers
[ "Modulo Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Modulo Addition", "Definition:Integers Modulo m", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure" ]
[ "Definition:Modulo Addition", "Division Theorem", "Definition:Integers Modulo m" ]
proofwiki-5526
Modulo Addition is Closed/Real Numbers
Let $z \in \R$ be a real number. Then addition modulo $z$ on the set of residue classes modulo $z$ is closed: :$\forall \eqclass x z, \eqclass y z \in \R_z: \eqclass x z +_z \eqclass y z \in \R_z$.
From the definition of addition modulo $z$, we have: :$\eqclass x z +_z \eqclass y z = \eqclass {x + y} z$ As $x, y \in R$, we have that $x + y \in \R$ as Real Addition is Closed. Hence by definition of congruence, $\eqclass {x + y} z \in \R_z$. {{qed}}
Let $z \in \R$ be a [[Definition:Real Number|real number]]. Then [[Definition:Modulo Addition|addition modulo $z$]] on the [[Definition:Set of Residue Classes|set of residue classes modulo $z$]] is [[Definition:Closed Algebraic Structure|closed]]: :$\forall \eqclass x z, \eqclass y z \in \R_z: \eqclass x z +_z \eqcla...
From the definition of [[Definition:Modulo Addition|addition modulo $z$]], we have: :$\eqclass x z +_z \eqclass y z = \eqclass {x + y} z$ As $x, y \in R$, we have that $x + y \in \R$ as [[Real Addition is Closed]]. Hence by definition of [[Definition:Congruence (Number Theory)|congruence]], $\eqclass {x + y} z \in \R...
Modulo Addition is Closed/Real Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Modulo_Addition_is_Closed/Real_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Modulo_Addition_is_Closed/Real_Numbers
[ "Modulo Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Modulo Addition", "Definition:Set of Residue Classes", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure" ]
[ "Definition:Modulo Addition", "Real Addition is Closed", "Definition:Congruence (Number Theory)" ]
proofwiki-5527
Field Homomorphism Preserves Subfields
Let $\struct {F_1, +_1, \circ_1}$ and $\struct {F_2, +_2, \circ_2}$ be fields. Let $\phi: F_1 \to F_2$ be a field homomorphism such that $\phi$ is not the trivial homomorphism. If $K$ is a subfield of $F_1$, then $\phi \sqbrk K$ is a subfield of $F_2$.
First note that if $\phi$ is the trivial homomorphism then $\phi \sqbrk K = 0_{F_2}$ and so is not a field. Since $K$ is a field, we have that: :$0_{F_1} \in K$ :$1_{F_1} \in K$ and so by Ring Homomorphism Preserves Zero and Field Homomorphism Preserves Unity: :$\map \phi {0_{F_1} } = 0_{F_2} \in \phi \sqbrk K$ :$\map ...
Let $\struct {F_1, +_1, \circ_1}$ and $\struct {F_2, +_2, \circ_2}$ be [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|fields]]. Let $\phi: F_1 \to F_2$ be a [[Definition:Field Homomorphism|field homomorphism]] such that $\phi$ is not the [[Definition:Trivial Homomorphism|trivial homomorphism]]. If $K$ is a [[Definition:Subf...
First note that if $\phi$ is the [[Definition:Trivial Homomorphism|trivial homomorphism]] then $\phi \sqbrk K = 0_{F_2}$ and so is not a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]]. Since $K$ is a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]], we have that: :$0_{F_1} \in K$ :$1_{F_1} \in K$ and so by [[Ring Homomorp...
Field Homomorphism Preserves Subfields
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_Homomorphism_Preserves_Subfields
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Field_Homomorphism_Preserves_Subfields
[ "Field Homomorphisms", "Subfields" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field Homomorphism", "Definition:Zero Homomorphism", "Definition:Subfield", "Definition:Subfield" ]
[ "Definition:Zero Homomorphism", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Ring Homomorphism Preserves Zero", "Field Homomorphism Preserves Unity", "Definition:Field Zero", "Definition:Multiplicative Identity", "Group Homomorphism Preserves Subgroups", "Definition...
proofwiki-5528
Set is Subset of Union/General Result
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\powerset S$ be the power set of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \forall T \in \mathbb S: T \subseteq \bigcup \mathbb S$
Let $x \in T$ for some $T \in \mathbb S$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x | o = \in | r = T | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = x | o = \in | r = \bigcup \mathbb S | c = {{Defof|Set Union}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = T | o = \subseteq | r = \bigcup \mat...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\powerset S$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \forall T \in \mathbb S: T \subseteq \bigcup \mathbb S$
Let $x \in T$ for some $T \in \mathbb S$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x | o = \in | r = T | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = x | o = \in | r = \bigcup \mathbb S | c = {{Defof|Set Union}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = T | o = \subseteq | r = \bigcup \m...
Set is Subset of Union/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_is_Subset_of_Union/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_is_Subset_of_Union/General_Result
[ "Set Union", "Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Power Set" ]
[ "Category:Set Union", "Category:Subsets" ]
proofwiki-5529
Intersection Distributes over Union/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $\powerset T$ be the power set of $T$. Let $\mathbb T$ be a subset of $\powerset T$. Then: :$\ds S \cap \bigcup \mathbb T = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cap X}$
=== Intersection Subset of Union === Let $\ds x \in S \cap \bigcup \mathbb T$. We need to show that $\ds x \in \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cap X}$ and then by definition of subset we will have shown that $\ds S \cap \bigcup \mathbb T \subseteq \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cap X}$. So, w...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $\powerset T$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $T$. Let $\mathbb T$ be a [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $\powerset T$. Then: :$\ds S \cap \bigcup \mathbb T = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cap X}$
=== Intersection Subset of Union === Let $\ds x \in S \cap \bigcup \mathbb T$. We need to show that $\ds x \in \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cap X}$ and then by definition of [[Definition:Subset|subset]] we will have shown that $\ds S \cap \bigcup \mathbb T \subseteq \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \...
Intersection Distributes over Union/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_Distributes_over_Union/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_Distributes_over_Union/General_Result
[ "Intersection Distributes over Union" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Subset" ]
[ "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set Intersection" ]
proofwiki-5530
Union Distributes over Intersection/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $\powerset T$ be the power set of $T$. Let $\mathbb T$ be a subset of $\powerset T$. Then: :$\ds S \cup \bigcap \mathbb T = \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cup X}$
=== Union Subset of Intersection === Let $\ds x \in S \cup \bigcap \mathbb T$. We need to show that: :$\ds x \in \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cup X}$ and then by definition of subset we will have shown that: :$\ds S \cup \bigcap \mathbb T \subseteq \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cup X}$. S...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $\powerset T$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $T$. Let $\mathbb T$ be a [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $\powerset T$. Then: :$\ds S \cup \bigcap \mathbb T = \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cup X}$
=== Union Subset of Intersection === Let $\ds x \in S \cup \bigcap \mathbb T$. We need to show that: :$\ds x \in \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \paren {S \cup X}$ and then by definition of [[Definition:Subset|subset]] we will have shown that: :$\ds S \cup \bigcap \mathbb T \subseteq \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb...
Union Distributes over Intersection/General Result/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_Distributes_over_Intersection/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_Distributes_over_Intersection/General_Result/Proof
[ "Union Distributes over Intersection" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Subset" ]
[ "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Set Union", "Proof by Cases", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set Union", "Proof by Cases", "...
proofwiki-5531
Scalar Multiple of Simple Function is Simple Function
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma}$ be a measurable space. Let $f: X \to \R$ be a simple function, and let $\lambda \in \R$. Then the pointwise scalar multiple $\lambda f: X \to \R$ of $f$ is also a simple function.
Let $\Img f$ denote the image of $f$. Let $\Img {\lambda f}$ denote the image of $\lambda f$. Consider the surjection $l_\lambda: \Img f \to \Img {\lambda f}$ defined by: :$\map {l_\lambda} {\map f x} := \lambda \map f x$ By Measurable Function is Simple Function iff Finite Image Set, $\card {\Img f}$ is finite. Hence ...
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma}$ be a [[Definition:Measurable Space|measurable space]]. Let $f: X \to \R$ be a [[Definition:Simple Function|simple function]], and let $\lambda \in \R$. Then the [[Definition:Pointwise Scalar Multiplication of Real-Valued Functions|pointwise scalar multiple]] $\lambda f: X \to \R$ of $f$ is ...
Let $\Img f$ denote the [[Definition:Image of Mapping|image]] of $f$. Let $\Img {\lambda f}$ denote the [[Definition:Image of Mapping|image]] of $\lambda f$. Consider the [[Definition:Surjection|surjection]] $l_\lambda: \Img f \to \Img {\lambda f}$ defined by: :$\map {l_\lambda} {\map f x} := \lambda \map f x$ By [...
Scalar Multiple of Simple Function is Simple Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Multiple_of_Simple_Function_is_Simple_Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Multiple_of_Simple_Function_is_Simple_Function
[ "Simple Functions" ]
[ "Definition:Measurable Space", "Definition:Simple Function", "Definition:Pointwise Scalar Multiplication of Mappings/Real-Valued Functions", "Definition:Simple Function" ]
[ "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping", "Definition:Surjection", "Measurable Function is Simple Function iff Finite Image Set", "Definition:Finite Set", "Cardinality of Codomain of Surjection", "Definition:Finite Set", "Measurable Function is S...
proofwiki-5532
Image of Composite Mapping
Let $f: S \to T$ and $g: R \to S$ be mappings. Then: :$\Img {f \circ g} = f \sqbrk {\Img g}$ where: : $f \circ g$ is the composition of $g$ and $f$ : $\operatorname{Img}$ denotes image : $f \sqbrk \cdot$ denotes taking image of a subset under $f$.
By definition of image: :$\Img {f \circ g} = \set {t \in T: \exists r \in R: \map {\paren {f \circ g} } r = t}$ and by definition of the image of a subset: :$f \sqbrk {\Img g} = \set {t \in T: \exists s \in \Img g: \map f s = t}$ which, expanding what it means that $s \in \Img g$, equals: :$f \sqbrk {\Img g} = \set {t ...
Let $f: S \to T$ and $g: R \to S$ be [[Definition:Mapping|mappings]]. Then: :$\Img {f \circ g} = f \sqbrk {\Img g}$ where: : $f \circ g$ is the [[Definition:Composite Mapping|composition]] of $g$ and $f$ : $\operatorname{Img}$ denotes [[Definition:Image of Mapping|image]] : $f \sqbrk \cdot$ denotes taking [[Definit...
By definition of [[Definition:Image of Mapping|image]]: :$\Img {f \circ g} = \set {t \in T: \exists r \in R: \map {\paren {f \circ g} } r = t}$ and by definition of the [[Definition:Image of Subset under Mapping|image of a subset]]: :$f \sqbrk {\Img g} = \set {t \in T: \exists s \in \Img g: \map f s = t}$ which, ex...
Image of Composite Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Composite_Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Composite_Mapping
[ "Composite Mappings" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Composition of Mappings", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Subset" ]
[ "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Subset", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Null Relation is Mapping iff Domain is Empty Set", "Definition:Empty Mapping", "Image of Empty Set is Empty Set" ]
proofwiki-5533
Scalar Multiple of Integrable Function is Integrable Function
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma, \mu}$ be a measure space. Let $f: X \to \overline \R$ be a $\mu$-integrable function, and let $\lambda \in \R$. Then $\lambda f: X \to \overline \R$, the pointwise $\lambda$-multiple of $f$, is also $\mu$-integrable. That is, the space of integrable functions $\LL^1_{\overline \R}$ is closed un...
{{proof wanted|standard machinery}}
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma, \mu}$ be a [[Definition:Measure Space|measure space]]. Let $f: X \to \overline \R$ be a [[Definition:Measure-Integrable Function|$\mu$-integrable function]], and let $\lambda \in \R$. Then $\lambda f: X \to \overline \R$, the [[Definition:Pointwise Scalar Multiplication of Extended Real-Valu...
{{proof wanted|standard machinery}}
Scalar Multiple of Integrable Function is Integrable Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Multiple_of_Integrable_Function_is_Integrable_Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_Multiple_of_Integrable_Function_is_Integrable_Function
[ "Measure-Integrable Functions" ]
[ "Definition:Measure Space", "Definition:Integrable Function/Measure Space", "Definition:Pointwise Scalar Multiplication of Extended Real-Valued Functions", "Definition:Integrable Function/Measure Space", "Definition:Space of Integrable Functions", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Poi...
[]
proofwiki-5534
Idempotent Elements for Integer Multiplication
There are exactly two integers which are idempotent with respect to multiplication: :$0 \times 0 = 0$ :$1 \times 1 = 1$
The integers $\struct {\Z, +, \times}$ form an integral domain. By definition of integral domain, therefore, the integers form a ring with no (proper) zero divisors. The result follows from Idempotent Elements of Ring with No Proper Zero Divisors. {{qed}}
There are exactly two [[Definition:Integer|integers]] which are [[Definition:Idempotent Element|idempotent]] with respect to [[Definition:Integer Multiplication|multiplication]]: :$0 \times 0 = 0$ :$1 \times 1 = 1$
The [[Definition:Integer|integers]] $\struct {\Z, +, \times}$ [[Integers form Integral Domain|form an integral domain]]. By definition of [[Definition:Integral Domain|integral domain]], therefore, the [[Definition:Integer|integers]] form a [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]] with no [[Definition:Proper Zero Di...
Idempotent Elements for Integer Multiplication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Idempotent_Elements_for_Integer_Multiplication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Idempotent_Elements_for_Integer_Multiplication
[ "Integer Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Idempotence/Element", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers" ]
[ "Definition:Integer", "Integers form Integral Domain", "Definition:Integral Domain", "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Proper Zero Divisor", "Idempotent Elements of Ring with No Proper Zero Divisors" ]
proofwiki-5535
Left Distributive Law for Natural Numbers
The operation of multiplication is left distributive over addition on the set of natural numbers $\N$: :$\forall x, y, n \in \N_{> 0}: n \times \paren {x + y} = \paren {n \times x} + \paren {n \times y}$
Let us cast the proposition in the form: :$\forall a, b, n \in \N_{> 0}: a \times \paren {b + n} = \paren {a \times b} + \paren {a \times n}$ For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :$\forall a, b \in \N_{> 0}: a \times \paren {b + n} = \paren {a \times b} + \paren {a \times n}$ === Basis for the I...
The operation of [[Definition:Natural Number Multiplication|multiplication]] is [[Definition:Left Distributive Operation|left distributive]] over [[Definition:Natural Number Addition|addition]] on the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]] $\N$: :$\forall x, y, n \in \N_{> 0}: n \times...
Let us cast the proposition in the form: :$\forall a, b, n \in \N_{> 0}: a \times \paren {b + n} = \paren {a \times b} + \paren {a \times n}$ For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$\forall a, b \in \N_{> 0}: a \times \paren {b + n} = \paren {a \times b} + \paren {a \t...
Left Distributive Law for Natural Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Left_Distributive_Law_for_Natural_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Left_Distributive_Law_for_Natural_Numbers
[ "Natural Numbers/1-Based" ]
[ "Definition:Multiplication/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Distributive Operation/Left", "Definition:Addition/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Natural Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Proposition", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Definition:Basis for the Induction", "Definition:Induction Hypothesis", "Definition:Induction Step", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Axiom:Axiomatization...
proofwiki-5536
Right Distributive Law for Natural Numbers
The operation of multiplication is right distributive over addition on the set of natural numbers $\N_{> 0}$: :$\forall x, y, n \in \N_{> 0}: \paren {x + y} \times n = \paren {x \times n} + \paren {y \times n}$
For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :$\forall a, b \in \N_{> 0}: \paren {a + b} \times n = \paren {a \times n} + \paren {b \times n}$ === Basis for the Induction === $\map P 1$ is the case: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \paren {a + b} \times 1 | r = a + b | c = Axiom $\text A$ }} {{eqn ...
The operation of [[Definition:Natural Number Multiplication|multiplication]] is [[Definition:Right Distributive Operation|right distributive]] over [[Definition:Natural Number Addition|addition]] on the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]] $\N_{> 0}$: :$\forall x, y, n \in \N_{> 0}: ...
For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$\forall a, b \in \N_{> 0}: \paren {a + b} \times n = \paren {a \times n} + \paren {b \times n}$ === Basis for the Induction === $\map P 1$ is the case: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \paren {a + b} \times 1 | r = a + b ...
Right Distributive Law for Natural Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Right_Distributive_Law_for_Natural_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Right_Distributive_Law_for_Natural_Numbers
[ "Natural Numbers/1-Based" ]
[ "Definition:Multiplication/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Distributive Operation/Right", "Definition:Addition/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Natural Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Proposition", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Definition:Basis for the Induction", "Definition:Induction Hypothesis", "Definition:Induction Step", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Right Distributive L...
proofwiki-5537
Standard Machinery
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma, \mu}$ be a measure space. Let $\map {\LL^1_{\overline \R} } \mu$ be the space of $\mu$-integrable functions. Let $\map P {f_1, \ldots, f_n}$ be a proposition, where the variables $f_i$ denote $\mu$-measurable functions $f_i: X \to \overline \R$. Let every occurrence of an $f_i$ be of the form: ...
{{proof wanted}} Category:Proof Techniques Category:Measure Theory lf6pm67jgqh6a126f0ew3uujbhppymn
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma, \mu}$ be a [[Definition:Measure Space|measure space]]. Let $\map {\LL^1_{\overline \R} } \mu$ be the [[Definition:Space of Integrable Functions|space of $\mu$-integrable functions]]. Let $\map P {f_1, \ldots, f_n}$ be a [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]], where the [[Definition:Variable|v...
{{proof wanted}} [[Category:Proof Techniques]] [[Category:Measure Theory]] lf6pm67jgqh6a126f0ew3uujbhppymn
Standard Machinery
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Standard_Machinery
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Standard_Machinery
[ "Proof Techniques", "Measure Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Measure Space", "Definition:Space of Integrable Functions", "Definition:Proposition", "Definition:Variable", "Definition:Measurable Function", "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Multilinear Mapping", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Characteristic Function (Set Theory)/Set", "Definiti...
[ "Category:Proof Techniques", "Category:Measure Theory" ]
proofwiki-5538
Third Principle of Mathematical Induction
Let $\map P n$ be a propositional function depending on $n \in \N$. If: :$(1): \quad \map P n$ is true for all $n \le d$ for some $d \in \N$ :$(2): \quad \forall m \in \N: \paren {\forall k \in \N, m \le k < m + d: \map P k} \implies \map P {m + d}$ then $\map P n$ is true for all $n \in \N$.
Let $A = \set {n \in \N: \map P n}$. We show that $A$ is an inductive set. By $(1)$: :$\forall 1 \le i \le d: i \in A$ Let: :$\forall x \ge d: \set {1, 2, \dotsc, x} \subset A$ Then by definition of $A$: :$\forall k \in \N: x - \paren {d - 1} \le k < x + 1: \map P k$ Thus $\map P {x + 1} \implies x + 1 \in A$ Thus $A$ ...
Let $\map P n$ be a [[Definition:Propositional Function|propositional function]] depending on $n \in \N$. If: :$(1): \quad \map P n$ is true for all $n \le d$ for some $d \in \N$ :$(2): \quad \forall m \in \N: \paren {\forall k \in \N, m \le k < m + d: \map P k} \implies \map P {m + d}$ then $\map P n$ is true for a...
Let $A = \set {n \in \N: \map P n}$. We show that $A$ is an [[Definition:Inductive Set as Subset of Real Numbers|inductive set]]. By $(1)$: :$\forall 1 \le i \le d: i \in A$ Let: :$\forall x \ge d: \set {1, 2, \dotsc, x} \subset A$ Then by definition of $A$: :$\forall k \in \N: x - \paren {d - 1} \le k < x + 1: \ma...
Third Principle of Mathematical Induction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Third_Principle_of_Mathematical_Induction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Third_Principle_of_Mathematical_Induction
[ "Number Theory", "Named Theorems", "Mathematical Induction", "Proof Techniques" ]
[ "Definition:Propositional Function" ]
[ "Definition:Inductive Set/Subset of Real Numbers" ]
proofwiki-5539
Cross-Relation is Equivalence Relation
{{Cross-Relation Context Definition}} Then $\boxtimes$ is an equivalence relation on $\struct {S_1 \times S_2, \oplus}$.
=== Reflexivity === :$\forall \tuple {x_1, y_1} \in S_1 \times S_2: x_1 \circ y_1 = x_1 \circ y_1 \implies \tuple {x_1, y_1} \boxtimes \tuple {x_1, y_1}$ So $\boxtimes$ is a reflexive relation. {{qed|lemma}}
{{Cross-Relation Context Definition}} Then $\boxtimes$ is an [[Definition:Equivalence Relation|equivalence relation]] on $\struct {S_1 \times S_2, \oplus}$.
=== Reflexivity === :$\forall \tuple {x_1, y_1} \in S_1 \times S_2: x_1 \circ y_1 = x_1 \circ y_1 \implies \tuple {x_1, y_1} \boxtimes \tuple {x_1, y_1}$ So $\boxtimes$ is a [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive relation]]. {{qed|lemma}}
Cross-Relation is Equivalence Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cross-Relation_is_Equivalence_Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cross-Relation_is_Equivalence_Relation
[ "Cross-Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Equivalence Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Reflexive Relation" ]
proofwiki-5540
Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers is Equivalence Relation
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the semigroup of natural numbers under addition. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the (external) direct product of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the operation on $\N \times \N$ induced by $+$ on $\N$. The relation $\boxtimes$ defined on $\N \times \N$ by: :$\tuple {x_1...
$\boxtimes$ is an instance of a cross-relation. We also have that Natural Number Addition is Commutative. The result therefore follows from Cross-Relation is Equivalence Relation. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the [[Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup|semigroup of natural numbers under addition]]. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the [[Definition:External Direct Product|(external) direct product]] of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the [[Definition:Opera...
$\boxtimes$ is an instance of a [[Definition:Cross-Relation|cross-relation]]. We also have that [[Natural Number Addition is Commutative]]. The result therefore follows from [[Cross-Relation is Equivalence Relation]]. {{qed}}
Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers is Equivalence Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cross-Relation_on_Natural_Numbers_is_Equivalence_Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cross-Relation_on_Natural_Numbers_is_Equivalence_Relation
[ "Natural Numbers", "Examples of Equivalence Relations", "Cross-Relations" ]
[ "Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup", "Definition:External Direct Product", "Definition:Operation Induced by Direct Product", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Equivalence Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Cross-Relation", "Natural Number Addition is Commutative", "Cross-Relation is Equivalence Relation" ]
proofwiki-5541
Equivalence Classes of Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the semigroup of natural numbers under addition. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the (external) direct product of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the operation on $\N \times \N$ induced by $+$ on $\N$. Let $\boxtimes$ be the cross-relation defined on $\N \times \N$ by: ...
We have that $\struct {\N, +}$ is a commutative semigroup from Natural Number Addition is Commutative. We also have the result Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers is Equivalence Relation. The result follows from the definition of equivalence class. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the [[Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup|semigroup of natural numbers under addition]]. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the [[Definition:External Direct Product|(external) direct product]] of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the [[Definition:Opera...
We have that $\struct {\N, +}$ is a [[Definition:Commutative Semigroup|commutative semigroup]] from [[Natural Number Addition is Commutative]]. We also have the result [[Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers is Equivalence Relation]]. The result follows from the definition of [[Definition:Equivalence Class|equivalence cl...
Equivalence Classes of Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_Classes_of_Cross-Relation_on_Natural_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_Classes_of_Cross-Relation_on_Natural_Numbers
[ "Natural Numbers", "Cartesian Product", "Examples of Equivalence Classes" ]
[ "Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup", "Definition:External Direct Product", "Definition:Operation Induced by Direct Product", "Definition:Cross-Relation", "Definition:Equivalence Class", "Definition:Equivalence Class" ]
[ "Definition:Commutative Semigroup", "Natural Number Addition is Commutative", "Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers is Equivalence Relation", "Definition:Equivalence Class" ]
proofwiki-5542
Integer Addition is Well-Defined
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the semigroup of natural numbers under addition. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the (external) direct product of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the operation on $\N \times \N$ induced by $+$ on $\N$. Let $\boxtimes$ be the cross-relation defined on $\N \times \N$ by: ...
Let $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {}, \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}, \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {}, \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$ be $\boxtimes$-equivalence classes such that $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {} = \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}$ and $\eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} = \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \eqclass {a_1, b_1} {} | r = \e...
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the [[Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup|semigroup of natural numbers under addition]]. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the [[Definition:External Direct Product|(external) direct product]] of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the [[Definition:Opera...
Let $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {}, \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}, \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {}, \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$ be [[Definition:Equivalence Class|$\boxtimes$-equivalence classes]] such that $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {} = \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}$ and $\eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} = \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \e...
Integer Addition is Well-Defined/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integer_Addition_is_Well-Defined
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Integer_Addition_is_Well-Defined/Proof_1
[ "Integer Addition", "Integer Addition is Well-Defined" ]
[ "Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup", "Definition:External Direct Product", "Definition:Operation Induced by Direct Product", "Definition:Cross-Relation", "Equivalence Classes of Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers", "Definition:Quotient Set", "Definition:Equivalence Class", "Defi...
[ "Definition:Equivalence Class", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Associative Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Associative Operation" ]
proofwiki-5543
Multiplication of Cross-Relation Equivalence Classes on Natural Numbers is Well-Defined
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the semigroup of natural numbers under addition. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the (external) direct product of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the operation on $\N \times \N$ induced by $+$ on $\N$. Let $\boxtimes$ be the cross-relation defined on $\N \times \N$ by: ...
Let $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {}, \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}, \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {}, \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$ be $\boxtimes$-equivalence classes such that $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {} = \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}$ and $\eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} = \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \eqclass {a_1, b_1} {} | r = \e...
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the [[Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup|semigroup of natural numbers under addition]]. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the [[Definition:External Direct Product|(external) direct product]] of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the [[Definition:Opera...
Let $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {}, \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}, \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {}, \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$ be [[Definition:Equivalence Class|$\boxtimes$-equivalence classes]] such that $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {} = \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}$ and $\eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} = \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \e...
Multiplication of Cross-Relation Equivalence Classes on Natural Numbers is Well-Defined
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Cross-Relation_Equivalence_Classes_on_Natural_Numbers_is_Well-Defined
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Cross-Relation_Equivalence_Classes_on_Natural_Numbers_is_Well-Defined
[ "Integers", "Multiplication", "Examples of Well-Defined Mappings" ]
[ "Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup", "Definition:External Direct Product", "Definition:Operation Induced by Direct Product", "Definition:Cross-Relation", "Equivalence Classes of Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers", "Definition:Operation/Binary Operation", "Definition:Equivalence C...
[ "Definition:Equivalence Class", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Associative Operation", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Multiplication/Integers", "Definition:Well-Defined/Operation" ]
proofwiki-5544
Addition of Cross-Relation Equivalence Classes on Natural Numbers is Cancellable
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the semigroup of natural numbers under addition. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the (external) direct product of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the operation on $\N \times \N$ induced by $+$ on $\N$. Let $\boxtimes$ be the cross-relation defined on $\N \times \N$ by: ...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \eqclass {a, b} {} \oplus \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} | r = \eqclass {a, b} {} \oplus \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {} | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \eqclass {b, a} {} \oplus \paren {\eqclass {a, b} {} \oplus \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} } | r = \eqclass {b, a} {} \oplus \paren {\eqc...
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the [[Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup|semigroup of natural numbers under addition]]. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the [[Definition:External Direct Product|(external) direct product]] of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the [[Definition:Opera...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \eqclass {a, b} {} \oplus \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} | r = \eqclass {a, b} {} \oplus \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {} | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \eqclass {b, a} {} \oplus \paren {\eqclass {a, b} {} \oplus \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} } | r = \eqclass {b, a} {} \oplus \paren {\eqc...
Addition of Cross-Relation Equivalence Classes on Natural Numbers is Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Addition_of_Cross-Relation_Equivalence_Classes_on_Natural_Numbers_is_Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Addition_of_Cross-Relation_Equivalence_Classes_on_Natural_Numbers_is_Cancellable
[ "Natural Number Addition", "Cross-Relations", "Equivalence Relations" ]
[ "Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup", "Definition:External Direct Product", "Definition:Operation Induced by Direct Product", "Definition:Cross-Relation", "Equivalence Classes of Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers", "Definition:Quotient Set", "Definition:Equivalence Class", "Defi...
[ "Integer Addition is Associative", "Identity for Addition of Cross-Relation Equivalence Classes on Natural Numbers" ]
proofwiki-5545
Cross-Relation Equivalence Classes on Natural Numbers are Cancellable for Addition
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the semigroup of natural numbers under addition. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the (external) direct product of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the operation on $\N \times \N$ induced by $+$ on $\N$. Let $\boxtimes$ be the cross-relation defined on $\N \times \N$ by: ...
Let $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {}, \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}, \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {}, \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$ be $\boxtimes$-equivalence classes such that $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {} = \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}$ and $\eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} = \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \eqclass {a_1, b_1} {} | r = \e...
Let $\struct {\N, +}$ be the [[Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup|semigroup of natural numbers under addition]]. Let $\struct {\N \times \N, \oplus}$ be the [[Definition:External Direct Product|(external) direct product]] of $\struct {\N, +}$ with itself, where $\oplus$ is the [[Definition:Opera...
Let $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {}, \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}, \eqclass {c_1, d_1} {}, \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$ be [[Definition:Equivalence Class|$\boxtimes$-equivalence classes]] such that $\eqclass {a_1, b_1} {} = \eqclass {a_2, b_2} {}$ and $\eqclass {c_1, d_1} {} = \eqclass {c_2, d_2} {}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \e...
Cross-Relation Equivalence Classes on Natural Numbers are Cancellable for Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cross-Relation_Equivalence_Classes_on_Natural_Numbers_are_Cancellable_for_Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cross-Relation_Equivalence_Classes_on_Natural_Numbers_are_Cancellable_for_Addition
[ "Natural Number Addition", "Cartesian Product", "Equivalence Relations" ]
[ "Natural Numbers under Addition form Commutative Semigroup", "Definition:External Direct Product", "Definition:Operation Induced by Direct Product", "Definition:Cross-Relation", "Equivalence Classes of Cross-Relation on Natural Numbers", "Definition:Quotient Set", "Definition:Equivalence Class", "Defi...
[ "Definition:Equivalence Class", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Associative Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Associative Operation" ]
proofwiki-5546
Cross-Relation is Congruence Relation
{{Cross-Relation Context Definition}} The cross-relation $\boxtimes$ is a congruence relation on $\struct {S_1 \times S_2, \oplus}$.
From Cross-Relation is Equivalence Relation we have that $\boxtimes$ is an equivalence relation. We now need to show that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \tuple {x_1, y_1} | o = \boxtimes | r = \tuple {x_2, y_2} | c = }} {{eqn | lo= \land | l = \tuple {u_1, v_1} | o = \boxtimes | r = \tu...
{{Cross-Relation Context Definition}} The [[Definition:Cross-Relation|cross-relation]] $\boxtimes$ is a [[Definition:Congruence Relation|congruence relation]] on $\struct {S_1 \times S_2, \oplus}$.
From [[Cross-Relation is Equivalence Relation]] we have that $\boxtimes$ is an [[Definition:Equivalence Relation|equivalence relation]]. We now need to show that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \tuple {x_1, y_1} | o = \boxtimes | r = \tuple {x_2, y_2} | c = }} {{eqn | lo= \land | l = \tuple {u_1,...
Cross-Relation is Congruence Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cross-Relation_is_Congruence_Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cross-Relation_is_Congruence_Relation
[ "Cross-Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Cross-Relation", "Definition:Congruence Relation" ]
[ "Cross-Relation is Equivalence Relation", "Definition:Equivalence Relation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Congruence Relation" ]
proofwiki-5547
Elements of Cross-Relation Equivalence Class
{{Cross-Relation Context Definition}} Let $\eqclass {\tuple {x, y} } \boxtimes$ be the $\boxtimes$-equivalence class of $\tuple {x, y}$, where $\tuple {x, y} \in S_1 \times S_2$. Then: $\forall x, y \in S_1, a, b \in S_2:$ :$(1): \quad \eqclass {\tuple {x \circ a, a} } \boxtimes = \eqclass {\tuple {y \circ b, b} } \box...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | n = 1 | l = \eqclass {\tuple {x \circ a, a} } \boxtimes | r = \eqclass {\tuple {y \circ b, b} } \boxtimes | c = }} {{eqn | l = \tuple {x \circ a, a} | o = \boxtimes | r = \tuple {y \circ b, b} | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadstoandfrom | l = x \circ a \circ b ...
{{Cross-Relation Context Definition}} Let $\eqclass {\tuple {x, y} } \boxtimes$ be the [[Definition:Equivalence Class|$\boxtimes$-equivalence class of $\tuple {x, y}$]], where $\tuple {x, y} \in S_1 \times S_2$. Then: $\forall x, y \in S_1, a, b \in S_2:$ :$(1): \quad \eqclass {\tuple {x \circ a, a} } \boxtimes = ...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | n = 1 | l = \eqclass {\tuple {x \circ a, a} } \boxtimes | r = \eqclass {\tuple {y \circ b, b} } \boxtimes | c = }} {{eqn | l = \tuple {x \circ a, a} | o = \boxtimes | r = \tuple {y \circ b, b} | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadstoandfrom | l = x \circ a \circ b ...
Elements of Cross-Relation Equivalence Class
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Elements_of_Cross-Relation_Equivalence_Class
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Elements_of_Cross-Relation_Equivalence_Class
[ "Cross-Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Equivalence Class" ]
[ "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Cancellable Element", "Definition:Associative Operation" ]
proofwiki-5548
Equivalence Class of Equal Elements of Cross-Relation
{{Cross-Relation Context Definition}} Then: :$\forall c, d \in S_1 \cap S_2: \tuple {c, c} \boxtimes \tuple {d, d}$
Note that in order for $\tuple {c, c}$ and $\tuple {d, d}$ to be defined, $c$ and $d$ must be in both $S_1$ and $S_2$. Hence the restriction given: :$\forall c, d \in S_1 \cap S_2$ Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall c, d \in S_1 \cap S_2 | l = c \circ d | r = d \circ c | c = Commutativity of $\ci...
{{Cross-Relation Context Definition}} Then: :$\forall c, d \in S_1 \cap S_2: \tuple {c, c} \boxtimes \tuple {d, d}$
Note that in order for $\tuple {c, c}$ and $\tuple {d, d}$ to be defined, $c$ and $d$ must be in both $S_1$ and $S_2$. Hence the restriction given: :$\forall c, d \in S_1 \cap S_2$ Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall c, d \in S_1 \cap S_2 | l = c \circ d | r = d \circ c | c = [[Definition:Commu...
Equivalence Class of Equal Elements of Cross-Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_Class_of_Equal_Elements_of_Cross-Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_Class_of_Equal_Elements_of_Cross-Relation
[ "Cross-Relations", "Examples of Equivalence Classes" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Commutative/Operation" ]
proofwiki-5549
Length of Concatenation
Let $S$ and $T$ be words, and let $ST$ be their concatenation. Then: :$\size {S T}\ = \size S + \size T$ where $\size S$ denotes the length of $S$.
Because of the unique readability of $ST$, we can determine for each symbol $s$ that is part of $S T$, whether: :$s$ is part of $S$ :$s$ is part of $T$ and furthermore, precisely one of these options occurs. There are $\size S$ symbols in $S$, and $\size T$ symbols in $T$. In total, then, $S T$ is seen to consist of $\...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Word (Formal Systems)|words]], and let $ST$ be their [[Definition:Concatenation (Formal Systems)|concatenation]]. Then: :$\size {S T}\ = \size S + \size T$ where $\size S$ denotes the [[Definition:Length of String|length]] of $S$.
Because of the [[Definition:Unique Readability|unique readability]] of $ST$, we can determine for each [[Definition:Symbol|symbol]] $s$ that is part of $S T$, whether: :$s$ is part of $S$ :$s$ is part of $T$ and furthermore, precisely one of these options occurs. There are $\size S$ [[Definition:Symbol|symbols]] in ...
Length of Concatenation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Length_of_Concatenation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Length_of_Concatenation
[ "Collations" ]
[ "Definition:Word (Formal Systems)", "Definition:Concatenation (Formal Systems)", "Definition:Length of String" ]
[ "Definition:Collation/Unique Readability", "Definition:Symbol", "Definition:Symbol", "Definition:Symbol", "Definition:Symbol", "Category:Collations" ]
proofwiki-5550
Preimage of Serial Relation is Domain
Let $\RR$ be a serial relation on $S$. Then the preimage of $\RR$ is $S$ (the domain of $\RR$).
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = S | o = \supseteq | r = \Preimg \RR | c = {{Defof|Preimage of Relation}} }} {{eqn | q = \forall s \in S: \exists t \in S | l = \tuple {s, t} | o = \in | r = \RR | c = {{Defof|Serial Relation}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall s \in S |...
Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Serial Relation|serial relation]] on $S$. Then the [[Definition:Preimage of Relation|preimage]] of $\RR$ is $S$ (the [[Definition:Domain of Relation|domain]] of $\RR$).
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = S | o = \supseteq | r = \Preimg \RR | c = {{Defof|Preimage of Relation}} }} {{eqn | q = \forall s \in S: \exists t \in S | l = \tuple {s, t} | o = \in | r = \RR | c = {{Defof|Serial Relation}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall s \in S |...
Preimage of Serial Relation is Domain
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Preimage_of_Serial_Relation_is_Domain
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Preimage_of_Serial_Relation_is_Domain
[ "Serial Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Serial Relation", "Definition:Preimage/Relation/Relation", "Definition:Domain (Set Theory)/Relation" ]
[ "Category:Serial Relations" ]
proofwiki-5551
Relation is Connected and Reflexive iff Total
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR$ be a relation on $S$. Then: :$\RR$ is both a connected relation and a reflexive relation {{iff}}: :$\RR$ is a total relation.
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR$ be a relation on $S$ which is both connected and reflexive. Let $\tuple {a, b} \in S \times S$. Suppose $a = b$. Then as $\RR$ is reflexive, $\tuple {a, b} \in \RR$. Suppose $a \ne b$. Then as $\RR$ is connected, $\tuple {a, b} \in \RR \lor \tuple {b, a} \in \RR$. That is: :$\foral...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] on $S$. Then: :$\RR$ is both a [[Definition:Connected Relation|connected relation]] and a [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive relation]] {{iff}}: :$\RR$ is a [[Definition:Total Relation|total relation]].
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] on $S$ which is both [[Definition:Connected Relation|connected]] and [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]]. Let $\tuple {a, b} \in S \times S$. Suppose $a = b$. Then as $\RR$ is [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]], $\tuple {a,...
Relation is Connected and Reflexive iff Total
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_is_Connected_and_Reflexive_iff_Total
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_is_Connected_and_Reflexive_iff_Total
[ "Total Relations", "Reflexive Relations", "Connected Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Connected Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Total Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Connected Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Connected Relation", "Definition:Total Relation", "Definition:Total Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Connected Relation" ]
proofwiki-5552
Total Ordering is Total Relation
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a total ordering. Then $\RR$ is a total relation.
By definition of total ordering: :$\RR$ is a reflexive relation on the strength of being an ordering :$\RR$ is a connected relation on the strength of being a total ordering. {{qed}} Category:Total Orderings Category:Total Relations ks8n1nv30vxvjpdtoogegijgsgy65gf
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Total Ordering|total ordering]]. Then $\RR$ is a [[Definition:Total Relation|total relation]].
By definition of [[Definition:Total Ordering|total ordering]]: :$\RR$ is a [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive relation]] on the strength of being an [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]] :$\RR$ is a [[Definition:Connected Relation|connected relation]] on the strength of being a [[Definition:Total Ordering|total orde...
Total Ordering is Total Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Total_Ordering_is_Total_Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Total_Ordering_is_Total_Relation
[ "Total Orderings", "Total Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Total Ordering", "Definition:Total Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Total Ordering", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Ordering", "Definition:Connected Relation", "Definition:Total Ordering", "Category:Total Orderings", "Category:Total Relations" ]
proofwiki-5553
Natural Number Addition Commutativity with Successor/Proof 2
Let $\N$ be the natural numbers. Then: :$\forall m, n \in \N_{> 0}: \left({m + 1}\right) + n = \left({m + n}\right) + 1$
Using the following axioms: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} Proof by induction: From Axiomatization of $1$-Based Natural Numbers, we have by definition that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall m, n \in \N | l = m + 0 | r = m }} {{eqn | l = \paren {m + n}^+ | r = m + n^+ }} {{end-eq...
Let $\N$ be the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]]. Then: :$\forall m, n \in \N_{> 0}: \left({m + 1}\right) + n = \left({m + n}\right) + 1$
Using the [[Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers|following axioms]]: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} Proof by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]]: From [[Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers|Axiomatization of $1$-Based Natural Numbers]], we have by definition ...
Natural Number Addition Commutativity with Successor/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_Commutativity_with_Successor/Proof_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_Commutativity_with_Successor/Proof_2
[ "Natural Number Addition Commutativity with Successor" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers" ]
[ "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Definition:Proposition", "Definition:Basis for the Induction", "Definition:Induction Hypothesis", "Definition:Induction Step", "Natural Number Addition is Assoc...
proofwiki-5554
Natural Number Commutes with 1 under Addition
Let $n \in \N_{> 0}$ be a natural number. Then $n$ commutes with $1$ under the operation of addition: :$\forall n \in \N_{> 0}: n + 1 = 1 + n$
Using the axiomatization: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :$n + 1 = 1 + n$
Let $n \in \N_{> 0}$ be a [[Definition:Natural Number|natural number]]. Then $n$ [[Definition:Commute|commutes]] with $1$ under the [[Definition:Binary Operation|operation]] of [[Definition:Natural Number Addition|addition]]: :$\forall n \in \N_{> 0}: n + 1 = 1 + n$
Using the [[Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers|axiomatization]]: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$n + 1 = 1 + n$
Natural Number Commutes with 1 under Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Commutes_with_1_under_Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Commutes_with_1_under_Addition
[ "Natural Numbers/1-Based", "Natural Number Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Commutative/Elements", "Definition:Operation/Binary Operation", "Definition:Addition/Natural Numbers" ]
[ "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Definition:Proposition", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers" ]
proofwiki-5555
Natural Number Addition is Commutative/Proof 3
The operation of addition on the set of natural numbers $\N_{> 0}$ is commutative: :$\forall x, y \in \N_{> 0}: x + y = y + x$
Using the following axioms: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} Let $x \in \N_{> 0}$ be arbitrary. For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :$x + n = n + x$ === Basis for the Induction === From Natural Number Commutes with 1 under Addition, we have that: :$\forall x \in \N_{> 0}: x ...
The operation of [[Definition:Natural Number Addition|addition]] on the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]] $\N_{> 0}$ is [[Definition:Commutative Operation|commutative]]: :$\forall x, y \in \N_{> 0}: x + y = y + x$
Using the [[Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers|following axioms]]: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} Let $x \in \N_{> 0}$ be arbitrary. For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$x + n = n + x$ === Basis for the Induction === From [[Nat...
Natural Number Addition is Commutative/Proof 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_is_Commutative/Proof_3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_is_Commutative/Proof_3
[ "Natural Numbers/1-Based", "Natural Number Addition is Commutative" ]
[ "Definition:Addition/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Commutative/Operation" ]
[ "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Definition:Proposition", "Natural Number Commutes with 1 under Addition", "Definition:Basis for the Induction", "Definition:Induction Hypothesis", "Definition:Induction Step", "Natural Number Addition is Associative", "Natural Number Addition is Comm...
proofwiki-5556
Ordering on Natural Numbers is Trichotomy
Let $\N$ be the natural numbers. Let $<$ be the (strict) ordering on $\N$. Then exactly one of the following is true: :$(1): \quad a = b$ :$(2): \quad a > b$ :$(3): \quad a < b$ That is, $<$ is a trichotomy on $\N$.
Applying the definition of $<$, the theorem becomes: Exactly one of the following is true: :$(1): \quad a = b$ :$(2): \quad \exists n \in \N_{>0} : b + n = a$ :$(3): \quad \exists n \in \N_{>0} : a + n = b$ We will use the principle of Mathematical Induction. Let $P \left({a}\right)$ be the proposition that exactly one...
Let $\N$ be the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]]. Let $<$ be the [[Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers|(strict) ordering on $\N$]]. Then exactly one of the following is true: :$(1): \quad a = b$ :$(2): \quad a > b$ :$(3): \quad a < b$ That is, $<$ is a [[Definition:Trichotomy|trichotomy]] on $\N$.
Applying the definition of $<$, the theorem becomes: Exactly one of the following is true: :$(1): \quad a = b$ :$(2): \quad \exists n \in \N_{>0} : b + n = a$ :$(3): \quad \exists n \in \N_{>0} : a + n = b$ We will use the [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|principle of Mathematical Induction]]. Let $P \left({a...
Ordering on Natural Numbers is Trichotomy
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Natural_Numbers_is_Trichotomy
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Natural_Numbers_is_Trichotomy
[ "Natural Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers", "Definition:Trichotomy" ]
[ "Principle of Mathematical Induction" ]
proofwiki-5557
Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers is Transitive
Let $\N_{> 0}$ be the $1$-based natural numbers. Let $<$ be the strict ordering on $\N_{>0}$. Then $<$ is a transitive relation.
Let $a < b$ and $b < c$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \exists x \in \N_{> 0} | l = a + x | r = b | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \land | q = \exists y \in \N_{> 0} | l = b + y | r = c | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \paren {a + x} + y | r = c | c = substituting ...
Let $\N_{> 0}$ be the [[Definition:1-Based Natural Numbers|$1$-based natural numbers]]. Let $<$ be the [[Definition:Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers|strict ordering on $\N_{>0}$]]. Then $<$ is a [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive relation]].
Let $a < b$ and $b < c$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \exists x \in \N_{> 0} | l = a + x | r = b | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \land | q = \exists y \in \N_{> 0} | l = b + y | r = c | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \paren {a + x} + y | r = c | c = substitutin...
Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers is Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_1-Based_Natural_Numbers_is_Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_1-Based_Natural_Numbers_is_Transitive
[ "Natural Numbers/1-Based" ]
[ "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers/1-Based", "Definition:Transitive Relation" ]
[ "Natural Number Addition is Associative" ]
proofwiki-5558
Trichotomy is Antireflexive
Let $\RR$ be a trichotomy. Then $\RR$ is an antireflexive relation.
Let $\RR$ be a trichotomy on a set $S$. Let $x \in S$. By definition of a trichotomy, for all $a, b \in S$, either: :$a \mathrel \RR b$ :$a = b$ :$b \mathrel \RR a$ As $x = x$ it follows directly that $x \not < x$. Hence the result by definition of antireflexive relation. {{qed}} Category:Antireflexive Relations Catego...
Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Trichotomy|trichotomy]]. Then $\RR$ is an [[Definition:Antireflexive Relation|antireflexive relation]].
Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Trichotomy|trichotomy]] on a [[Definition:Set|set]] $S$. Let $x \in S$. By definition of a [[Definition:Trichotomy|trichotomy]], for all $a, b \in S$, either: :$a \mathrel \RR b$ :$a = b$ :$b \mathrel \RR a$ As $x = x$ it follows directly that $x \not < x$. Hence the result by definitio...
Trichotomy is Antireflexive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trichotomy_is_Antireflexive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Trichotomy_is_Antireflexive
[ "Antireflexive Relations", "Trichotomies" ]
[ "Definition:Trichotomy", "Definition:Antireflexive Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Trichotomy", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Trichotomy", "Definition:Antireflexive Relation", "Category:Antireflexive Relations", "Category:Trichotomies" ]
proofwiki-5559
Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers is Total Ordering
Let $\N_{> 0}$ be the $1$-based natural numbers. Let $<$ be the strict ordering on $\N_{>0}$. Then $<$ is a (strict) total ordering.
From Ordering on $1$-Based Natural Numbers is Trichotomy we have that $<$ is trichotomy. From Ordering on $1$-Based Natural Numbers is Transitive we have that $<$ is transitive. From Trichotomy is Antireflexive it follows that $<$ is antireflexive. It follows by definition that $<$ is a strict ordering. By the trichoto...
Let $\N_{> 0}$ be the [[Definition:1-Based Natural Numbers|$1$-based natural numbers]]. Let $<$ be the [[Definition:Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers|strict ordering on $\N_{>0}$]]. Then $<$ is a [[Definition:Strict Total Ordering|(strict) total ordering]].
From [[Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers is Trichotomy|Ordering on $1$-Based Natural Numbers is Trichotomy]] we have that $<$ is [[Definition:Trichotomy|trichotomy]]. From [[Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers is Transitive|Ordering on $1$-Based Natural Numbers is Transitive]] we have that $<$ is [[Definition:Transi...
Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers is Total Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_1-Based_Natural_Numbers_is_Total_Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_1-Based_Natural_Numbers_is_Total_Ordering
[ "Natural Numbers/1-Based" ]
[ "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers/1-Based", "Definition:Strict Total Ordering" ]
[ "Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers is Trichotomy", "Definition:Trichotomy", "Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers is Transitive", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Trichotomy is Antireflexive", "Definition:Antireflexive Relation", "Definition:Strict Ordering", "Trichotomy Law (Ordering)", "Definit...
proofwiki-5560
Left Cancellable Commutative Operation is Right Cancellable
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be an algebraic structure. Let $\circ$ be left cancellable and also commutative. Then $\circ$ is also right cancellable.
Let $\circ$ be both left cancellable and commutative on a set $S$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \circ c | r = b \circ c | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = c \circ a | r = c \circ b | c = $\circ$ is Commutative }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = a | r = b | c = $\circ$ i...
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be an [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with One Operation|algebraic structure]]. Let $\circ$ be [[Definition:Left Cancellable Operation|left cancellable]] and also [[Definition:Commutative Operation|commutative]]. Then $\circ$ is also [[Definition:Right Cancellable Operation|right cancellabl...
Let $\circ$ be both [[Definition:Left Cancellable Operation|left cancellable]] and [[Definition:Commutative Operation|commutative]] on a [[Definition:Set|set]] $S$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \circ c | r = b \circ c | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = c \circ a | r = c \circ b | ...
Left Cancellable Commutative Operation is Right Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Left_Cancellable_Commutative_Operation_is_Right_Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Left_Cancellable_Commutative_Operation_is_Right_Cancellable
[ "Commutativity", "Cancellability" ]
[ "Definition:Algebraic Structure/One Operation", "Definition:Left Cancellable Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Right Cancellable Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Left Cancellable Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Left Cancellable Operation" ]
proofwiki-5561
Right Cancellable Commutative Operation is Left Cancellable
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be an algebraic structure. Let $\circ$ be right cancellable and also commutative. Then $\circ$ is also left cancellable.
Let $\circ$ be both right cancellable and commutative on a set $S$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \circ b | r = a \circ c | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = b \circ a | r = c \circ a | c = $\circ$ is Commutative }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = b | r = c | c = $\circ$ ...
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be an [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with One Operation|algebraic structure]]. Let $\circ$ be [[Definition:Right Cancellable Operation|right cancellable]] and also [[Definition:Commutative Operation|commutative]]. Then $\circ$ is also [[Definition:Left Cancellable Operation|left cancellabl...
Let $\circ$ be both [[Definition:Right Cancellable Operation|right cancellable]] and [[Definition:Commutative Operation|commutative]] on a [[Definition:Set|set]] $S$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \circ b | r = a \circ c | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = b \circ a | r = c \circ a ...
Right Cancellable Commutative Operation is Left Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Right_Cancellable_Commutative_Operation_is_Left_Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Right_Cancellable_Commutative_Operation_is_Left_Cancellable
[ "Commutativity", "Cancellability" ]
[ "Definition:Algebraic Structure/One Operation", "Definition:Right Cancellable Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Left Cancellable Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Right Cancellable Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Right Cancellable Operation" ]
proofwiki-5562
Natural Number Addition is Cancellable
Let $\N$ be the natural numbers. Let $+$ be addition on $\N$. Then: :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a + c = b + c \implies a = b$ :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a + b = a + c \implies b = c$ That is, $+$ is cancellable on $\N$.
Consider the natural numbers $\N$ defined as a naturally ordered semigroup $\struct {\N, +, \le}$. By {{NOSAxiom|2}}, every element of $\struct {\N, +}$ is cancellable. {{qed}}
Let $\N$ be the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]]. Let $+$ be [[Definition:Natural Number Addition|addition]] on $\N$. Then: :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a + c = b + c \implies a = b$ :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a + b = a + c \implies b = c$ That is, $+$ is [[Definition:Cancellable Operation|cancellable]] ...
Consider the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]] $\N$ defined as a [[Definition:Naturally Ordered Semigroup|naturally ordered semigroup]] $\struct {\N, +, \le}$. By {{NOSAxiom|2}}, every element of $\struct {\N, +}$ is [[Definition:Cancellable Element|cancellable]]. {{qed}}
Natural Number Addition is Cancellable/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_is_Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_is_Cancellable/Proof_1
[ "Natural Number Addition", "Examples of Cancellable Operations", "Natural Number Addition is Cancellable" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Addition/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Cancellable Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Naturally Ordered Semigroup", "Definition:Cancellable Element" ]
proofwiki-5563
Natural Number Addition is Cancellable
Let $\N$ be the natural numbers. Let $+$ be addition on $\N$. Then: :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a + c = b + c \implies a = b$ :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a + b = a + c \implies b = c$ That is, $+$ is cancellable on $\N$.
By Natural Number Addition is Commutative, we only need to prove the first statement. Proof by induction. Consider the natural numbers $\N$ defined in terms of Peano's Axioms. From the definition of addition in Peano structure, we have that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall m, n \in \N | l = m + 0 | r = m ...
Let $\N$ be the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]]. Let $+$ be [[Definition:Natural Number Addition|addition]] on $\N$. Then: :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a + c = b + c \implies a = b$ :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a + b = a + c \implies b = c$ That is, $+$ is [[Definition:Cancellable Operation|cancellable]] ...
By [[Natural Number Addition is Commutative/Proof 2|Natural Number Addition is Commutative]], we only need to prove the first statement. Proof by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction for Peano Structure|induction]]. Consider the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]] $\N$ defined in terms of [[Axiom:Peano's...
Natural Number Addition is Cancellable/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_is_Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_is_Cancellable/Proof_2
[ "Natural Number Addition", "Examples of Cancellable Operations", "Natural Number Addition is Cancellable" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Addition/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Cancellable Operation" ]
[ "Natural Number Addition is Commutative/Proof 2", "Principle of Mathematical Induction/Peano Structure", "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Axiom:Peano's Axioms", "Definition:Addition/Peano Structure", "Definition:Proposition", "Definition:Basis for the Induction", "Definition:Induction Hypothesis", "De...
proofwiki-5564
Uniqueness of Measures
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma}$ be a measurable space. Let $\GG \subseteq \powerset X$ be a generator for $\Sigma$; that is, $\Sigma = \map \sigma \GG$. Suppose that $\GG$ satisfies the following conditions: :$(1):\quad \forall G, H \in \GG: G \cap H \in \GG$ :$(2):\quad$ There exists an exhausting sequence $\sequence {G_n}_...
Define, for all $n \in \N$, $\DD_n$ by: :$\DD_n := \set {E \in \Sigma: \map \mu {G_n \cap E} = \map \nu {G_n \cap E} }$ Let us show that $\DD_n$ is a Dynkin system. By Intersection with Subset is Subset, $G_n \cap X = G_n$, whence $(3)$ implies that $X \in \DD_n$. Now, let $D \in \DD_n$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l =...
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma}$ be a [[Definition:Measurable Space|measurable space]]. Let $\GG \subseteq \powerset X$ be a [[Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets/Generator|generator]] for $\Sigma$; that is, $\Sigma = \map \sigma \GG$. Suppose that $\GG$ satisfies the following conditions: :$(1):\qu...
Define, for all $n \in \N$, $\DD_n$ by: :$\DD_n := \set {E \in \Sigma: \map \mu {G_n \cap E} = \map \nu {G_n \cap E} }$ Let us show that $\DD_n$ is a [[Definition:Dynkin System|Dynkin system]]. By [[Intersection with Subset is Subset]], $G_n \cap X = G_n$, whence $(3)$ implies that $X \in \DD_n$. Now, let $D \in \...
Uniqueness of Measures/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Uniqueness_of_Measures
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Uniqueness_of_Measures/Proof_1
[ "Measure Theory", "Measures", "Uniqueness of Measures", "Measures", "Uniqueness of Measures" ]
[ "Definition:Measurable Space", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets/Generator", "Definition:Exhausting Sequence of Sets", "Definition:Measure (Measure Theory)", "Definition:Finite Extended Real Number" ]
[ "Definition:Dynkin System", "Intersection with Subset is Subset", "Intersection with Set Difference is Set Difference with Intersection", "Set Difference and Intersection form Partition", "Measure is Finitely Additive Function", "Definition:Sequence", "Definition:Pairwise Disjoint", "Intersection Dist...
proofwiki-5565
Uniqueness of Measures
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma}$ be a measurable space. Let $\GG \subseteq \powerset X$ be a generator for $\Sigma$; that is, $\Sigma = \map \sigma \GG$. Suppose that $\GG$ satisfies the following conditions: :$(1):\quad \forall G, H \in \GG: G \cap H \in \GG$ :$(2):\quad$ There exists an exhausting sequence $\sequence {G_n}_...
Define the set: :$\AA = \set {T \in \Sigma: \forall G \in \GG: \map \mu {G \cap T} = \map \nu {G \cap T} }$ By Intersection with Subset is Subset, it follows that: :$\forall G \in \GG: G \cap X = G$ Therefore, {{hypothesis}} $(3)$: :$X \in \AA$ Now, define the set: :$\Sigma' = \set {S \in \Sigma: \forall T \in \AA: \ma...
Let $\struct {X, \Sigma}$ be a [[Definition:Measurable Space|measurable space]]. Let $\GG \subseteq \powerset X$ be a [[Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets/Generator|generator]] for $\Sigma$; that is, $\Sigma = \map \sigma \GG$. Suppose that $\GG$ satisfies the following conditions: :$(1):\qu...
Define the [[Definition:Set|set]]: :$\AA = \set {T \in \Sigma: \forall G \in \GG: \map \mu {G \cap T} = \map \nu {G \cap T} }$ By [[Intersection with Subset is Subset]], it follows that: :$\forall G \in \GG: G \cap X = G$ Therefore, {{hypothesis}} $(3)$: :$X \in \AA$ Now, define the [[Definition:Set|set]]: :$\Sigma...
Uniqueness of Measures/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Uniqueness_of_Measures
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Uniqueness_of_Measures/Proof_2
[ "Measure Theory", "Measures", "Uniqueness of Measures", "Measures", "Uniqueness of Measures" ]
[ "Definition:Measurable Space", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets/Generator", "Definition:Exhausting Sequence of Sets", "Definition:Measure (Measure Theory)", "Definition:Finite Extended Real Number" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Intersection with Subset is Subset", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Restriction/Mapping", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra Generated by Collection of Subsets", "Definition:Set Equality", "Definition:Sigma-Algebra", "Intersection is Associative", "Definition:By Hypothesis", "Intersection...
proofwiki-5566
Natural Number Multiplication is Cancellable
Let $\N$ be the natural numbers. Let $\times$ be multiplication on $\N$. Then: :$\forall x, y, z \in \N_{>0}: x \times z = y \times z \implies x = y$ :$\forall x, y, z \in \N_{>0}: x \times y = x \times z \implies y = z$ That is, $\times$ is cancellable on $\N_{>0}$.
By Natural Number Multiplication is Commutative, proving one of the assertions suffices. From Ordering on Natural Numbers is Compatible with Multiplication it follows that: :$\forall x, y, z \in \N: x < y \iff x \times z < y \times z$ Interchanging $x$ and $y$, we obtain: :$\forall x, y, z \in \N: y < x \iff y \times z...
Let $\N$ be the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]]. Let $\times$ be [[Definition:Natural Number Multiplication|multiplication]] on $\N$. Then: :$\forall x, y, z \in \N_{>0}: x \times z = y \times z \implies x = y$ :$\forall x, y, z \in \N_{>0}: x \times y = x \times z \implies y = z$ That is, $\times$ ...
By [[Natural Number Multiplication is Commutative]], proving one of the assertions suffices. From [[Ordering on Natural Numbers is Compatible with Multiplication]] it follows that: :$\forall x, y, z \in \N: x < y \iff x \times z < y \times z$ Interchanging $x$ and $y$, we obtain: :$\forall x, y, z \in \N: y < x \i...
Natural Number Multiplication is Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Multiplication_is_Cancellable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Multiplication_is_Cancellable
[ "Examples of Cancellable Operations", "Natural Number Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Multiplication/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Cancellable Operation" ]
[ "Natural Number Multiplication is Commutative", "Ordering on Natural Numbers is Compatible with Multiplication", "Ordering on Natural Numbers is Trichotomy", "Definition:Cancellable Operation" ]
proofwiki-5567
Natural Number Addition is Cancellable for Ordering
Let $\N$ be the natural numbers. Let $<$ be the strict ordering on $\N$. Let $+$ be addition on $\N$. Then: :$\forall a, b, c \in \N_{>0}: a + c < b + c \implies a < b$ :$\forall a, b, c \in \N_{>0}: a + b < a + c \implies b < c$ That is, $+$ is cancellable on $\N$ for $<$.
{{ProofWanted}} Category:Natural Number Addition Category:Examples of Cancellable Operations nbgpynwtclm58j7no3ognibx6pfc6nq
Let $\N$ be the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]]. Let $<$ be the [[Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers|strict ordering on $\N$]]. Let $+$ be [[Definition:Natural Number Addition|addition]] on $\N$. Then: :$\forall a, b, c \in \N_{>0}: a + c < b + c \implies a < b$ :$\forall a, b, c \in \N_{>0}: a +...
{{ProofWanted}} [[Category:Natural Number Addition]] [[Category:Examples of Cancellable Operations]] nbgpynwtclm58j7no3ognibx6pfc6nq
Natural Number Addition is Cancellable for Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_is_Cancellable_for_Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Addition_is_Cancellable_for_Ordering
[ "Natural Number Addition", "Examples of Cancellable Operations" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers", "Definition:Addition/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Cancellable Operation" ]
[ "Category:Natural Number Addition", "Category:Examples of Cancellable Operations" ]
proofwiki-5568
Natural Number Multiplication is Cancellable for Ordering
Let $\N$ be the natural numbers. Let $\times$ be multiplication on $\N$. Let $<$ be the strict ordering on $\N$. Then: :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a \times c < b \times c \implies a < b$ :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a \times b < a \times c \implies b < c$ That is, $\times$ is cancellable on $\N$ for $<$.
{{proof wanted}} Category:Examples of Cancellable Operations Category:Natural Number Multiplication 4jy5waacgramzyozgw5mrge19x723xf
Let $\N$ be the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]]. Let $\times$ be [[Definition:Natural Number Multiplication|multiplication]] on $\N$. Let $<$ be the [[Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers|strict ordering on $\N$]]. Then: :$\forall a, b, c \in \N: a \times c < b \times c \implies a < b$ :$\forall a,...
{{proof wanted}} [[Category:Examples of Cancellable Operations]] [[Category:Natural Number Multiplication]] 4jy5waacgramzyozgw5mrge19x723xf
Natural Number Multiplication is Cancellable for Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Multiplication_is_Cancellable_for_Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_Multiplication_is_Cancellable_for_Ordering
[ "Examples of Cancellable Operations", "Natural Number Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Multiplication/Natural Numbers", "Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers", "Definition:Cancellable Operation" ]
[ "Category:Examples of Cancellable Operations", "Category:Natural Number Multiplication" ]
proofwiki-5569
Successor to Natural Number
Let $\N_{> 0}$ be the 1-based natural numbers: :$\N_{> 0} = \left\{{1, 2, 3, \ldots}\right\}$ Let $<$ be the ordering on $\N_{> 0}$: :$\forall a, b \in \N_{>0}: a < b \iff \exists c \in \N_{>0}: a + c = b$ Let $a \in \N_{>0}$. Then there exists no natural number $n$ such that $a < n < a + 1$.
Using the following axioms: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} Suppose that $\exists n \in \N_{>0}: a < n < a + 1$. Then by the definition of ordering on natural numbers: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a + x | r = n | c = Definition of Ordering on Natural Numbers: $a < n$ }} {{eqn | l = n + y ...
Let $\N_{> 0}$ be the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|1-based natural numbers]]: :$\N_{> 0} = \left\{{1, 2, 3, \ldots}\right\}$ Let $<$ be the [[Definition:Ordering on 1-Based Natural Numbers|ordering on $\N_{> 0}$]]: :$\forall a, b \in \N_{>0}: a < b \iff \exists c \in \N_{>0}: a + c = b$ Let $a \in \N_{>0}$. Then th...
Using the [[Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers|following axioms]]: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} Suppose that $\exists n \in \N_{>0}: a < n < a + 1$. Then by the definition of [[Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers|ordering on natural numbers]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a + x ...
Successor to Natural Number
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Successor_to_Natural_Number
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Successor_to_Natural_Number
[ "Natural Numbers/1-Based" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers/1-Based", "Definition:Natural Numbers" ]
[ "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers", "Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers", "Definition:Ordering on Natural Numbers", "Natural Number Addition is Associative", "Addition on 1-Based Natural Numbers is Cancellable", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Base...
proofwiki-5570
Natural Number is Not Equal to Successor
Let $\N_{> 0}$ be the $1$-based natural numbers: :$\N_{> 0} = \set {1, 2, 3, \ldots}$ Then: :$\forall n \in \N_{> 0}: n \ne n + 1$
Using the following axioms: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} Proof by induction: For all $n \in \N_{>0}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :$n \ne n + 1$ === Basis for the Induction === $\map P 1$ is the case: :$1 \ne 1 + 1$ From axiom $E$: :$E: \quad \forall a, b \in \N_{> 0}: \text{ exactly 1 of...
Let $\N_{> 0}$ be the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|$1$-based natural numbers]]: :$\N_{> 0} = \set {1, 2, 3, \ldots}$ Then: :$\forall n \in \N_{> 0}: n \ne n + 1$
Using the [[Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers|following axioms]]: {{:Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers}} Proof by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]]: For all $n \in \N_{>0}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$n \ne n + 1$ === Basis for the Ind...
Natural Number is Not Equal to Successor/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_is_Not_Equal_to_Successor
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Number_is_Not_Equal_to_Successor/Proof_1
[ "Natural Numbers/1-Based" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers" ]
[ "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Proposition", "Axiom:Axiomatization of 1-Based Natural Numbers", "Definition:Basis for the Induction", "Definition:Induction Hypothesis", "Definition:Induction Step", "Natural Number is Not Equal to S...
proofwiki-5571
Biconditional is Commutative
==== Formulation 1 ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1}} ==== Formulation 2 ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2}}
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q \vdash q \iff p}} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{BiconditionalElimination|2|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{BiconditionalElimination|3|1|q \implies p|1|2}} {{BiconditionalIntro|4|1|q \iff p|3|2}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|q \iff p \vdash p \iff q}} {{Premise|1|q \iff p}} {{BiconditionalElimin...
==== [[Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1|Formulation 1]] ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1}} ==== [[Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2|Formulation 2]] ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2}}
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q \vdash q \iff p}} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{BiconditionalElimination|2|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{BiconditionalElimination|3|1|q \implies p|1|2}} {{BiconditionalIntro|4|1|q \iff p|3|2}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed|lemma}} {{BeginTableau|q \iff p \vdash p \iff q}} {{Premise|1|q \iff p}} {{BiconditionalElim...
Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Commutative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Commutative/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Biconditional" ]
[ "Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1", "Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2" ]
[]
proofwiki-5572
Biconditional is Commutative
==== Formulation 1 ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1}} ==== Formulation 2 ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2}}
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q \vdash q \iff p}} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p}|1|Rule of Material Equivalence}} {{Commutation|3|1|\paren {q \implies p} \land \paren {p \implies q}|2|Conjunction}} {{SequentIntro|4|1|q \iff p|3|Rule of Material Equivalence}} {{EndTab...
==== [[Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1|Formulation 1]] ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1}} ==== [[Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2|Formulation 2]] ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2}}
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q \vdash q \iff p}} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p}|1|[[Rule of Material Equivalence]]}} {{Commutation|3|1|\paren {q \implies p} \land \paren {p \implies q}|2|Conjunction}} {{SequentIntro|4|1|q \iff p|3|[[Rule of Material Equivalence]]}} ...
Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Commutative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Commutative/Formulation_1/Proof_2
[ "Biconditional" ]
[ "Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1", "Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2" ]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Rule of Material Equivalence" ]
proofwiki-5573
Biconditional is Commutative
==== Formulation 1 ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1}} ==== Formulation 2 ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2}}
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connectives match for all boolean interpretations. $\begin{array}{|ccc||ccc|} \hline p & \iff & q & q & \iff & p \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \F & \T & \F \\ \F & \F & \T & \T & \F & \F \\ \T & \F & \F & \F & \F & \T \\ \T & ...
==== [[Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1|Formulation 1]] ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1}} ==== [[Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2|Formulation 2]] ==== {{:Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2}}
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]]. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connectives]] match for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. $\begin{array}{|ccc||ccc|} \hline p & \iff & ...
Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Commutative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Commutative/Formulation_1/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Biconditional" ]
[ "Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 1", "Biconditional is Commutative/Formulation 2" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-5574
Biconditional is Reflexive
:$\vdash p \iff p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \iff p}} {{TheoremIntro|1|p \implies p|Law of Identity: Formulation 2}} {{BiconditionalIntro|2||p \iff p|1|1}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
:$\vdash p \iff p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \iff p}} {{TheoremIntro|1|p \implies p|[[Law of Identity/Formulation 2|Law of Identity: Formulation 2]]}} {{BiconditionalIntro|2||p \iff p|1|1}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
Biconditional is Reflexive/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Reflexive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Reflexive/Proof_1
[ "Biconditional is Reflexive", "Biconditional" ]
[]
[ "Law of Identity/Formulation 2" ]
proofwiki-5575
Biconditional is Reflexive
:$\vdash p \iff p$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connective match for both boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|ccc|} \hline p & \iff & p \\ \hline \F & \T & \F \\ \T & \T & \T \\ \hline \end {array}$</nowiki> {{qed}}
:$\vdash p \iff p$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]]. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connective]] match for both [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|ccc|} \hline p & \i...
Biconditional is Reflexive/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Reflexive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Reflexive/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Biconditional is Reflexive", "Biconditional" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-5576
Biconditional is Transitive
The biconditional operator is transitive:
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q, q \iff r \vdash p \iff r}} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{Premise|2|q \iff r}} {{BiconditionalElimination|3|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{BiconditionalElimination|4|2|q \implies r|2|1}} {{SequentIntro|5|1, 2|p \implies r|1, 2|Hypothetical Syllogism: Formulation 1}} {{BiconditionalElimination|6|1|q \implies ...
The [[Definition:Biconditional|biconditional operator]] is [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]:
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q, q \iff r \vdash p \iff r}} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{Premise|2|q \iff r}} {{BiconditionalElimination|3|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{BiconditionalElimination|4|2|q \implies r|2|1}} {{SequentIntro|5|1, 2|p \implies r|1, 2|[[Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 1|Hypothetical Syllogism: Formulation 1]]}} {...
Biconditional is Transitive/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Transitive/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Biconditional" ]
[ "Definition:Biconditional", "Definition:Transitive Relation" ]
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 1", "Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 1" ]
proofwiki-5577
Biconditional is Transitive
The biconditional operator is transitive:
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen for all boolean interpretations by inspection, where the truth values under the main connective on the {{LHS}} is $T$, that under the one on the {{RHS}} is also $T$: :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|ccccccc||ccc|} \hline (p & \iff & q) & \land & (q & \iff & r) & p & \iff & ...
The [[Definition:Biconditional|biconditional operator]] is [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]:
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]]. As can be seen for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]] by inspection, where the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connective]] on the {{LHS}} is $T$, that under the one on the ...
Biconditional is Transitive/Formulation 1/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Transitive/Formulation_1/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Biconditional" ]
[ "Definition:Biconditional", "Definition:Transitive Relation" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic" ]
proofwiki-5578
Ordinals are Totally Ordered
The ordinals are totally ordered.
Follows directly from Relation between Two Ordinals and Subset Relation is Ordering. {{qed}} Category:Ordinals 7j5gt4exlrw1dxv82z8s62oow1hw3bv
The [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinals]] are [[Definition:Total Ordering|totally ordered]].
Follows directly from [[Relation between Two Ordinals]] and [[Subset Relation is Ordering]]. {{qed}} [[Category:Ordinals]] 7j5gt4exlrw1dxv82z8s62oow1hw3bv
Ordinals are Totally Ordered
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordinals_are_Totally_Ordered
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordinals_are_Totally_Ordered
[ "Ordinals" ]
[ "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Total Ordering" ]
[ "Relation between Two Ordinals", "Subset Relation is Ordering", "Category:Ordinals" ]
proofwiki-5579
Successor Set of Transitive Set is Transitive
Let $S$ be a transitive set. Then its successor set $S^+ = S \cup \set S$ is also transitive.
Recall that $S$ is '''transitive''' {{iff}}: :$x \in S \implies x \subseteq S$ Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in S^+ | l = x | o = \in | r = S | c = }} {{eqn | lo= \lor | l = x | r = S | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = x | o = \subseteq | r = ...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Transitive Set|transitive set]]. Then its [[Definition:Successor Set|successor set]] $S^+ = S \cup \set S$ is also [[Definition:Transitive Set|transitive]].
Recall that $S$ is '''[[Definition:Transitive Set|transitive]]''' {{iff}}: :$x \in S \implies x \subseteq S$ Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in S^+ | l = x | o = \in | r = S | c = }} {{eqn | lo= \lor | l = x | r = S | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = x ...
Successor Set of Transitive Set is Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Successor_Set_of_Transitive_Set_is_Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Successor_Set_of_Transitive_Set_is_Transitive
[ "Successor Mapping", "Transitive Classes" ]
[ "Definition:Transitive Class", "Definition:Successor Mapping/Successor Set", "Definition:Transitive Class" ]
[ "Definition:Transitive Class", "Set is Subset of Itself", "Proof by Cases", "Set is Subset of Union" ]
proofwiki-5580
Successor Set of Ordinal is Ordinal
Let $\On$ denote the class of all ordinals. Let $\alpha \in \On$ be an ordinal. Then its successor set $\alpha^+ = \alpha \cup \set \alpha$ is also an ordinal.
We have the result that Class of All Ordinals is Minimally Superinductive over Successor Mapping. Hence $\On$ is {{afortiori}} a superinductive class {{WRT}} the successor mapping. Hence, by definition of superinductive class: :$\On$ is closed under the successor mapping. That is: :$\forall \alpha \in \On: \alpha^+ \in...
Let $\On$ denote the [[Definition:Class of All Ordinals|class of all ordinals]]. Let $\alpha \in \On$ be an [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinal]]. Then its [[Definition:Successor Set|successor set]] $\alpha^+ = \alpha \cup \set \alpha$ is also an [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinal]].
We have the result that [[Class of All Ordinals is Minimally Superinductive over Successor Mapping]]. Hence $\On$ is {{afortiori}} a [[Definition:Superinductive Class|superinductive class]] {{WRT}} the [[Definition:Successor Mapping|successor mapping]]. Hence, by definition of [[Definition:Superinductive Class|superi...
Successor Set of Ordinal is Ordinal/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Successor_Set_of_Ordinal_is_Ordinal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Successor_Set_of_Ordinal_is_Ordinal/Proof_1
[ "Successor Set of Ordinal is Ordinal", "Ordinals", "Successor Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Class of All Ordinals", "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Successor Mapping/Successor Set", "Definition:Ordinal" ]
[ "Class of All Ordinals is Minimally Superinductive over Successor Mapping", "Definition:Superinductive Class", "Definition:Successor Mapping", "Definition:Superinductive Class", "Definition:Closed under Mapping/Class Theory", "Definition:Successor Mapping" ]
proofwiki-5581
Successor Set of Ordinal is Ordinal
Let $\On$ denote the class of all ordinals. Let $\alpha \in \On$ be an ordinal. Then its successor set $\alpha^+ = \alpha \cup \set \alpha$ is also an ordinal.
{{explain|Would be insightful to make the definition of ordinal being used explicit.}} From Ordinal is Transitive, it follows by Successor Set of Transitive Set is Transitive that $\alpha^+$ is transitive. We now have to show that $\alpha^+$ is strictly well-ordered by the epsilon restriction $\Epsilon {\restriction_{\...
Let $\On$ denote the [[Definition:Class of All Ordinals|class of all ordinals]]. Let $\alpha \in \On$ be an [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinal]]. Then its [[Definition:Successor Set|successor set]] $\alpha^+ = \alpha \cup \set \alpha$ is also an [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinal]].
{{explain|Would be insightful to make the definition of ordinal being used explicit.}} From [[Ordinal is Transitive]], it follows by [[Successor Set of Transitive Set is Transitive]] that $\alpha^+$ is [[Definition:Transitive Set|transitive]]. We now have to show that $\alpha^+$ is [[Definition:Strict Well-Ordering|st...
Successor Set of Ordinal is Ordinal/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Successor_Set_of_Ordinal_is_Ordinal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Successor_Set_of_Ordinal_is_Ordinal/Proof_2
[ "Successor Set of Ordinal is Ordinal", "Ordinals", "Successor Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Class of All Ordinals", "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Successor Mapping/Successor Set", "Definition:Ordinal" ]
[ "Ordinal is Transitive", "Successor Set of Transitive Set is Transitive", "Definition:Transitive Class", "Definition:Strict Well-Ordering", "Definition:Epsilon Relation/Restriction", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Intersection with Subset is Subset", "Intersection Distributes over...
proofwiki-5582
Ordinals are Well-Ordered
The ordinals are well-ordered.
Recall that the Ordinals are Totally Ordered. Let $A$ be a non-empty set of ordinals. Let $\alpha \in A$. Let $B = \alpha^+ \cap A$, where $\alpha^+$ denotes the successor set of $\alpha$. Recall that $\alpha^+$ is an ordinal. Note that $\alpha \in B$, so $B$ is non-empty. By Intersection is Subset, $B \subseteq \alpha...
The [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinals]] are [[Definition:Well-Ordering|well-ordered]].
Recall that the [[Ordinals are Totally Ordered]]. Let $A$ be a [[Definition:Non-Empty Set|non-empty]] [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinals]]. Let $\alpha \in A$. Let $B = \alpha^+ \cap A$, where $\alpha^+$ denotes the [[Definition:Successor Set|successor set]] of $\alpha$. Recall that [[Successor...
Ordinals are Well-Ordered/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordinals_are_Well-Ordered
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordinals_are_Well-Ordered/Proof_1
[ "Ordinals", "Ordinals are Well-Ordered" ]
[ "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Well-Ordering" ]
[ "Ordinals are Totally Ordered", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Successor Mapping/Successor Set", "Successor Set of Ordinal is Ordinal", "Definition:Empty Set", "Intersection is Subset", "Definition:Existential Quantifier", "Definition:Smallest Eleme...
proofwiki-5583
Ordinals are Well-Ordered
The ordinals are well-ordered.
By Ordinals are Totally Ordered, the ordinals are totally ordered by $\subseteq$: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = X | o = \subsetneqq | r = Y | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadstoandfrom | q = \exists a \in Y | l = X | r = Y_a | c = where $Y_a$ denotes the initial segment of $Y$ determined ...
The [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinals]] are [[Definition:Well-Ordering|well-ordered]].
By [[Ordinals are Totally Ordered]], the [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinals]] are [[Definition:Total Ordering|totally ordered]] by $\subseteq$: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = X | o = \subsetneqq | r = Y | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadstoandfrom | q = \exists a \in Y | l = X | r = Y_a | c = w...
Ordinals are Well-Ordered/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordinals_are_Well-Ordered
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordinals_are_Well-Ordered/Proof_2
[ "Ordinals", "Ordinals are Well-Ordered" ]
[ "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Well-Ordering" ]
[ "Ordinals are Totally Ordered", "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Total Ordering", "Definition:Initial Segment", "Definition:Strict Total Ordering", "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Strict Total Ordering", "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Well-Ordering", "Definition:Seque...
proofwiki-5584
Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Corollary/Proof 1
Let $A, B, S$ be sets. Then: :$A \subseteq B \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$
Let $A \subseteq B$, and let $S$ be any set. From Set Intersection Preserves Subsets: :$A \subseteq B, \ S \subseteq T \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap T$ for arbitrary sets $S$ and $T$. Substituting $S$ for $T$: :$A \subseteq B, \ S \subseteq S \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$ From Set is Subset of Itself, $S \...
Let $A, B, S$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Then: :$A \subseteq B \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$
Let $A \subseteq B$, and let $S$ be any set. From [[Set Intersection Preserves Subsets]]: :$A \subseteq B, \ S \subseteq T \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap T$ for arbitrary sets $S$ and $T$. Substituting $S$ for $T$: :$A \subseteq B, \ S \subseteq S \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$ From [[Set is Subset of It...
Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Corollary/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Intersection_Preserves_Subsets/Corollary/Proof_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Intersection_Preserves_Subsets/Corollary/Proof_1
[ "Set Intersection Preserves Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Set" ]
[ "Set Intersection Preserves Subsets", "Set is Subset of Itself" ]
proofwiki-5585
Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Corollary
Let $A, B, S$ be sets. Then: :$A \subseteq B \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$
Let $A \subseteq B$, and let $S$ be any set. From Set Intersection Preserves Subsets: :$A \subseteq B, \ S \subseteq T \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap T$ for arbitrary sets $S$ and $T$. Substituting $S$ for $T$: :$A \subseteq B, \ S \subseteq S \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$ From Set is Subset of Itself, $S \...
Let $A, B, S$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Then: :$A \subseteq B \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$
Let $A \subseteq B$, and let $S$ be any set. From [[Set Intersection Preserves Subsets]]: :$A \subseteq B, \ S \subseteq T \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap T$ for arbitrary sets $S$ and $T$. Substituting $S$ for $T$: :$A \subseteq B, \ S \subseteq S \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$ From [[Set is Subset of It...
Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Corollary/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Intersection_Preserves_Subsets/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Intersection_Preserves_Subsets/Corollary/Proof_1
[ "Set Intersection Preserves Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Set" ]
[ "Set Intersection Preserves Subsets", "Set is Subset of Itself" ]
proofwiki-5586
Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Corollary
Let $A, B, S$ be sets. Then: :$A \subseteq B \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$
Recall the Factor Principles, themselves a corollary of the Praeclarum Theorema: :$\paren {p \implies q} \vdash \paren {p \land r} \implies \paren {q \land r}$ This is applied as: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | o = | r = A \subseteq B | c = }} {{eqn | o = \leadsto | r = \paren {x \in A \implies x \in B} ...
Let $A, B, S$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Then: :$A \subseteq B \implies A \cap S \subseteq B \cap S$
Recall the [[Factor Principles]], themselves a [[Definition:Corollary|corollary]] of the [[Praeclarum Theorema]]: :$\paren {p \implies q} \vdash \paren {p \land r} \implies \paren {q \land r}$ This is applied as: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | o = | r = A \subseteq B | c = }} {{eqn | o = \leadsto | r = \p...
Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Corollary/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Intersection_Preserves_Subsets/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Intersection_Preserves_Subsets/Corollary/Proof_2
[ "Set Intersection Preserves Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Set" ]
[ "Factor Principles", "Definition:Corollary", "Praeclarum Theorema", "Factor Principles" ]
proofwiki-5587
Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Families of Sets/Corollary
Let $I$ be an indexing set. Let $\family {B_\alpha}_{\alpha \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of subsets of a set $S$. Let $A$ be a set such that $A \subseteq B_\alpha$ for all $\alpha \in I$. Then: :$\ds A \subseteq \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in I} B_\alpha$
For each $\alpha \in I$, define $A_\alpha := A$. Then by Set Intersection is Idempotent, it follows that: :$\ds \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in I} A_\alpha = A$ Since $A \subseteq B_\alpha$ for all $\alpha \in I$, the premises of Set Intersection Preserves Subsets are satisfied. Applying this theorem gives: :$\ds A = \bigc...
Let $I$ be an [[Definition:Indexing Set|indexing set]]. Let $\family {B_\alpha}_{\alpha \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family of Subsets|indexed family of subsets]] of a [[Definition:Set|set]] $S$. Let $A$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]] such that $A \subseteq B_\alpha$ for all $\alpha \in I$. Then: :$\ds...
For each $\alpha \in I$, define $A_\alpha := A$. Then by [[Set Intersection is Idempotent/Indexed Family|Set Intersection is Idempotent]], it follows that: :$\ds \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in I} A_\alpha = A$ Since $A \subseteq B_\alpha$ for all $\alpha \in I$, the premises of [[Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Fam...
Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Families of Sets/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Intersection_Preserves_Subsets/Families_of_Sets/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Intersection_Preserves_Subsets/Families_of_Sets/Corollary
[ "Set Intersection Preserves Subsets", "Indexed Families" ]
[ "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family of Subsets", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Set" ]
[ "Set Intersection is Idempotent/Indexed Family", "Set Intersection Preserves Subsets/Families of Sets", "Category:Set Intersection Preserves Subsets", "Category:Indexed Families" ]
proofwiki-5588
Intersection is Largest Subset/General Result
Let $T$ be a set. Let $\powerset T$ be the power set of $T$. Let $\mathbb T$ be a subset of $\powerset T$. Then: :$\paren {\forall X \in \mathbb T: S \subseteq X} \iff S \subseteq \bigcap \mathbb T$ === Family of Sets === In the context of a family of sets, the result can be presented as follows: {{:Intersection is Lar...
Let $\mathbb T \subseteq \powerset T$. Suppose that $\forall X \in \mathbb T: S \subseteq X$. Consider any $x \in S$. By definition of subset, it follows that: :$\forall X \in \mathbb T: x \in X$ Thus it follows from definition of set intersection that: :$x \in \bigcap \mathbb T$ Thus by definition of subset, it follow...
Let $T$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\powerset T$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $T$. Let $\mathbb T$ be a [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $\powerset T$. Then: :$\paren {\forall X \in \mathbb T: S \subseteq X} \iff S \subseteq \bigcap \mathbb T$ === [[Intersection is Largest Subset/Family of Se...
Let $\mathbb T \subseteq \powerset T$. Suppose that $\forall X \in \mathbb T: S \subseteq X$. Consider any $x \in S$. By definition of [[Definition:Subset|subset]], it follows that: :$\forall X \in \mathbb T: x \in X$ Thus it follows from definition of [[Definition:Set Intersection|set intersection]] that: :$x \in ...
Intersection is Largest Subset/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_is_Largest_Subset/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_is_Largest_Subset/General_Result
[ "Set Intersection", "Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Subset", "Intersection is Largest Subset/Family of Sets", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family of Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Subset", "Intersection is Subset/General Result", "Subset Relation is Transitive" ]
proofwiki-5589
Union is Smallest Superset/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $\powerset S$ denote the power set of $S$. Let $\mathbb S$ be a subset of $\powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \paren {\forall X \in \mathbb S: X \subseteq T} \iff \bigcup \mathbb S \subseteq T$ === Family of Sets === In the context of a family of sets, the result can be presented as follows: {{:Unio...
Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. By Union of Subsets is Subset: Subset of Power Set: :$\ds \paren {\forall X \in \mathbb S: X \subseteq T} \implies \bigcup \mathbb S \subseteq T$ {{qed|lemma}} Now suppose that $\ds \bigcup \mathbb S \subseteq T$. Consider any $X \in \mathbb S$ and take any $x \in X$. From Set is ...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $\powerset S$ denote the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $S$. Let $\mathbb S$ be a [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $\powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \paren {\forall X \in \mathbb S: X \subseteq T} \iff \bigcup \mathbb S \subseteq T$ === [[Union is Smallest Superset/F...
Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. By [[Union of Subsets is Subset/Subset of Power Set|Union of Subsets is Subset: Subset of Power Set]]: :$\ds \paren {\forall X \in \mathbb S: X \subseteq T} \implies \bigcup \mathbb S \subseteq T$ {{qed|lemma}} Now suppose that $\ds \bigcup \mathbb S \subseteq T$. Consider an...
Union is Smallest Superset/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_is_Smallest_Superset/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_is_Smallest_Superset/General_Result
[ "Set Union", "Subsets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Subset", "Union is Smallest Superset/Family of Sets", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family of Subsets" ]
[ "Union of Subsets is Subset/Subset of Power Set", "Set is Subset of Union/General Result" ]
proofwiki-5590
Mapping is Involution iff Bijective and Symmetric
Let $S$ be a set. Let $f: S \to S$ be a mapping on $S$. Then $f$ is an involution {{iff}} $f$ is both a bijection and a symmetric relation.
By definition an involution on $S$ is a mapping such that: :$\forall x \in S: \map f {\map f x} = x$
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $f: S \to S$ be a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] on $S$. Then $f$ is an [[Definition:Involution (Mapping)|involution]] {{iff}} $f$ is both a [[Definition:Bijection|bijection]] and a [[Definition:Symmetric Relation|symmetric relation]].
By definition an [[Definition:Involution (Mapping)|involution on $S$]] is a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] such that: :$\forall x \in S: \map f {\map f x} = x$
Mapping is Involution iff Bijective and Symmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Mapping_is_Involution_iff_Bijective_and_Symmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Mapping_is_Involution_iff_Bijective_and_Symmetric
[ "Involutions", "Bijections", "Symmetric Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Involution (Mapping)", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Symmetric Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Involution (Mapping)", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Involution (Mapping)", "Definition:Involution (Mapping)", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Involution (Mapping)" ]
proofwiki-5591
Cardinality of Set Union/Corollary
Let $S_1, S_2, \ldots, S_n$ be finite sets which are pairwise disjoint. Then: :$\ds \card {\bigcup_{i \mathop = 1}^n S_i} = \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^n \card {S_i}$ Specifically: :$\card {S_1 \cup S_2} = \card {S_1} + \card {S_2}$
As $S_1, S_2, \ldots, S_n$ are pairwise disjoint, their intersections are all empty. The Cardinality of Set Union holds, but from Cardinality of Empty Set, all the terms apart from the first vanish. {{qed}}
Let $S_1, S_2, \ldots, S_n$ be [[Definition:Finite Set|finite sets]] which are [[Definition:Disjoint Sets|pairwise disjoint]]. Then: :$\ds \card {\bigcup_{i \mathop = 1}^n S_i} = \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^n \card {S_i}$ Specifically: :$\card {S_1 \cup S_2} = \card {S_1} + \card {S_2}$
As $S_1, S_2, \ldots, S_n$ are [[Definition:Disjoint Sets|pairwise disjoint]], their [[Definition:Set Intersection|intersections]] are all [[Definition:Empty Set|empty]]. The [[Cardinality of Set Union]] holds, but from [[Cardinality of Empty Set]], all the terms apart from the first vanish. {{qed}}
Cardinality of Set Union/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinality_of_Set_Union/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cardinality_of_Set_Union/Corollary
[ "Cardinality of Set Union" ]
[ "Definition:Finite Set", "Definition:Disjoint Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Disjoint Sets", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Empty Set", "Cardinality of Set Union", "Cardinality of Empty Set" ]
proofwiki-5592
Cartesian Product of Preimage with Image of Relation is Correspondence
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a relation. Then the restriction of $\RR$ to $\Preimg \RR \times \Img \RR$ is a correspondence.
By the definition of a correspondence it will be shown that $\RR$ is both left-total and right-total. $\RR$ is left-total {{iff}}: :$\forall x \in S: \exists y \in T: x \mathrel \RR y$ By the definition of the pre-image of $\RR$: :$\Preimg \RR = \set {x \in S: \exists y \in T: x \mathrel \RR y}$ Therefore $\RR$ is left...
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a [[Definition:relation|relation]]. Then the [[Definition:Restriction of Relation|restriction]] of $\RR$ to $\Preimg \RR \times \Img \RR$ is a [[Definition:Correspondence|correspondence]].
By the definition of a [[Definition:Correspondence|correspondence]] it will be shown that $\RR$ is both [[Definition:Left-Total Relation|left-total]] and [[Definition:Right-Total Relation|right-total]]. $\RR$ is [[Definition:Left-Total Relation|left-total]] {{iff}}: :$\forall x \in S: \exists y \in T: x \mathrel \RR...
Cartesian Product of Preimage with Image of Relation is Correspondence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cartesian_Product_of_Preimage_with_Image_of_Relation_is_Correspondence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cartesian_Product_of_Preimage_with_Image_of_Relation_is_Correspondence
[ "Relation Theory" ]
[ "Definition:relation", "Definition:Restriction/Relation", "Definition:Correspondence" ]
[ "Definition:Correspondence", "Definition:Left-Total Relation", "Definition:Right-Total Relation", "Definition:Left-Total Relation", "Definition:Preimage/Relation/Relation", "Definition:Left-Total Relation", "Definition:Right-Total Relation", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Relation/Relation", "Defini...
proofwiki-5593
Image of Intersection under Relation/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a relation. Let $\powerset S$ be the power set of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} \subseteq \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall X \in \mathbb S | l = \bigcap \mathbb S | o = \subseteq | r = X | c = Intersection is Subset: General Result }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall X \in \mathbb S | l = \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} | o = \subseteq | r = \RR \sqbrk X ...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]]. Let $\powerset S$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} \subseteq \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sq...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall X \in \mathbb S | l = \bigcap \mathbb S | o = \subseteq | r = X | c = [[Intersection is Subset/General Result|Intersection is Subset: General Result]] }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \forall X \in \mathbb S | l = \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} | ...
Image of Intersection under Relation/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Intersection_under_Relation/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Intersection_under_Relation/General_Result
[ "Image of Intersection under Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Power Set" ]
[ "Intersection is Subset/General Result", "Image of Subset under Relation is Subset of Image", "Intersection is Largest Subset/General Result", "Category:Image of Intersection under Relation" ]
proofwiki-5594
Image of Intersection under One-to-Many Relation/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a relation. Let $\powerset S$ be the power set of $S$. Then: :$\ds \forall \mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S: \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} = \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$ {{iff}} $\RR$ is one-to-many.
=== Sufficient Condition === Suppose: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} = \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$ where $\mathbb S$ is ''any'' subset of $\powerset S$. Then by definition of $\mathbb S$: :$\forall S_1, S_2 \in \mathbb S: \RR \sqbrk {S_1 \cap S_2} = \RR \sqbrk {S_1} \cap \RR \sqbrk {S_2}$ and...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]]. Let $\powerset S$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $S$. Then: :$\ds \forall \mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S: \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} = \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$ ...
=== Sufficient Condition === Suppose: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} = \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$ where $\mathbb S$ is ''any'' [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $\powerset S$. Then by definition of $\mathbb S$: :$\forall S_1, S_2 \in \mathbb S: \RR \sqbrk {S_1 \cap S_2} = \RR \sqbrk {S_1} \c...
Image of Intersection under One-to-Many Relation/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Intersection_under_One-to-Many_Relation/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Intersection_under_One-to-Many_Relation/General_Result
[ "Image of Intersection under One-to-Many Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:One-to-Many Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Subset", "Image of Intersection under One-to-Many Relation", "Definition:One-to-Many Relation", "Definition:One-to-Many Relation", "Definition:One-to-Many Relation", "Definition:One-to-Many Relation", "Definition:Subset" ]
proofwiki-5595
Image of Union under Relation/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a relation. Let $\powerset S$ be the power set of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb S} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = t | o = \in | r = \RR \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb S} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadstoandfrom | q = \exists s \in \bigcup \mathbb S | l = t | o = \in | r = \map \RR s | c = Image of Subset under Relation equals Union of Images of Elements }} {{eqn | ll= \leadstoandf...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]]. Let $\powerset S$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb S} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = t | o = \in | r = \RR \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb S} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadstoandfrom | q = \exists s \in \bigcup \mathbb S | l = t | o = \in | r = \map \RR s | c = [[Image of Subset under Relation equals Union of Images of Elements]] }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto...
Image of Union under Relation/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Union_under_Relation/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Union_under_Relation/General_Result
[ "Image of Union under Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Power Set" ]
[ "Image of Subset under Relation equals Union of Images of Elements", "Category:Image of Union under Relation" ]
proofwiki-5596
Image of Union under Mapping/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $f: S \to T$ be a mapping. Let $\powerset S$ be the power set of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds f \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb S} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} f \sqbrk X$ This can be expressed in the language and notation of direct image mappings as: :$\ds \forall...
As $f$, being a mapping, is also a relation, we can apply Image of Union under Relation: General Result: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb S} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$ {{qed}}
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $f: S \to T$ be a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]]. Let $\powerset S$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds f \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb S} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} f \sqbrk X$ This can be express...
As $f$, being a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]], is also a [[Definition:Relation|relation]], we can apply [[Image of Union under Relation/General Result|Image of Union under Relation: General Result]]: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb S} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$ {{qed}}
Image of Union under Mapping/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Union_under_Mapping/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Union_under_Mapping/General_Result
[ "Image of Union under Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Direct Image Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Relation", "Image of Union under Relation/General Result" ]
proofwiki-5597
Preimage of Union under Mapping/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $f: S \to T$ be a mapping. Let $\powerset T$ be the power set of $T$. Let $\mathbb T \subseteq \powerset T$. Then: :$\ds f^{-1} \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb T} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} f^{-1} \sqbrk X$
As $f$, being a mapping, is also a relation, we can apply Preimage of Union under Relation: General Result: :$\ds \RR^{-1} \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb T} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \RR^{-1} \sqbrk X$ {{qed}}
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $f: S \to T$ be a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]]. Let $\powerset T$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $T$. Let $\mathbb T \subseteq \powerset T$. Then: :$\ds f^{-1} \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb T} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} f^{-1} \sqbrk X$
As $f$, being a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]], is also a [[Definition:Relation|relation]], we can apply [[Preimage of Union under Relation/General Result|Preimage of Union under Relation: General Result]]: :$\ds \RR^{-1} \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb T} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \RR^{-1} \sqbrk X$ {{qed}}
Preimage of Union under Mapping/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Preimage_of_Union_under_Mapping/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Preimage_of_Union_under_Mapping/General_Result
[ "Preimage of Union under Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Power Set" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Relation", "Preimage of Union under Relation/General Result" ]
proofwiki-5598
Preimage of Union under Relation/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a relation. Let $\powerset T$ be the power set of $T$. Let $\mathbb T \subseteq \powerset T$. Then: :$\ds \RR^{-1} \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb T} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \RR^{-1} \sqbrk X$ where $\RR^{-1} \sqbrk X$ denotes the preimage of $X$ under $\RR...
We have that $\RR^{-1}$ is a relation. The result follows from Image of Union under Relation: General Result. {{qed}} Category:Preimage of Union under Relation 16qvgywv4ku7oc1lyi9d44gxd95zlxw
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]]. Let $\powerset T$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $T$. Let $\mathbb T \subseteq \powerset T$. Then: :$\ds \RR^{-1} \sqbrk {\bigcup \mathbb T} = \bigcup_{X \mathop \in \mathbb T} \RR^{-1} \...
We have that $\RR^{-1}$ is a [[Definition:Relation|relation]]. The result follows from [[Image of Union under Relation/General Result|Image of Union under Relation: General Result]]. {{qed}} [[Category:Preimage of Union under Relation]] 16qvgywv4ku7oc1lyi9d44gxd95zlxw
Preimage of Union under Relation/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Preimage_of_Union_under_Relation/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Preimage_of_Union_under_Relation/General_Result
[ "Preimage of Union under Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Preimage/Relation/Subset" ]
[ "Definition:Relation", "Image of Union under Relation/General Result", "Category:Preimage of Union under Relation" ]
proofwiki-5599
Image of Intersection under Mapping/General Result
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $f: S \to T$ be a mapping. Let $\powerset S$ be the power set of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds f \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} \subseteq \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} f \sqbrk X$
As $f$, being a mapping, is also a relation, we can apply Image of Intersection under Relation: General Result: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} \subseteq \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$ {{qed}}
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $f: S \to T$ be a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]]. Let $\powerset S$ be the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $S$. Let $\mathbb S \subseteq \powerset S$. Then: :$\ds f \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} \subseteq \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} f \sqbrk X$
As $f$, being a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]], is also a [[Definition:Relation|relation]], we can apply [[Image of Intersection under Relation/General Result|Image of Intersection under Relation: General Result]]: :$\ds \RR \sqbrk {\bigcap \mathbb S} \subseteq \bigcap_{X \mathop \in \mathbb S} \RR \sqbrk X$ {{qed}}
Image of Intersection under Mapping/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Intersection_under_Mapping/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Intersection_under_Mapping/General_Result
[ "Image of Intersection under Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Power Set" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Relation", "Image of Intersection under Relation/General Result" ]