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-6600
Every Ultrafilter Converges implies Every Filter has Adherent Point
Let $T = \struct {S, \tau}$ be a topological space. Let every ultrafilter on $S$ be convergent. Then every filter on $S$ has a adherent point.
Let $\FF$ be a filter on $S$. By the Ultrafilter Lemma, there exists an ultrafilter $\FF'$ such that $\FF \subseteq \FF'$. We have {{hypothesis}} that $\FF'$ converges to some $x \in S$. This, by Adherent Point of Filter iff Superfilter Converges, implies that $x$ is a adherent point of $\FF$. {{qed}} {{BPI|Ultrafilte...
Let $T = \struct {S, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Topological Space|topological space]]. Let every [[Definition:Ultrafilter on Set|ultrafilter]] on $S$ be [[Definition:Convergent Filter|convergent]]. Then every [[Definition:Filter on Set|filter]] on $S$ has a [[Definition:Adherent Point of Filter|adherent point]].
Let $\FF$ be a [[Definition:Filter on Set|filter]] on $S$. By the [[Ultrafilter Lemma]], there exists an [[Definition:Ultrafilter on Set|ultrafilter]] $\FF'$ such that $\FF \subseteq \FF'$. We have {{hypothesis}} that $\FF'$ [[Definition:Convergent Filter|converges]] to some $x \in S$. This, by [[Adherent Point of ...
Every Ultrafilter Converges implies Every Filter has Adherent Point
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Every_Ultrafilter_Converges_implies_Every_Filter_has_Adherent_Point
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Every_Ultrafilter_Converges_implies_Every_Filter_has_Adherent_Point
[ "Filters on Sets", "Ultrafilters on Sets", "Adherent Points", "Convergent Filters" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Ultrafilter on Set", "Definition:Convergent Filter", "Definition:Filter on Set", "Definition:Adherent Point/Filter" ]
[ "Definition:Filter on Set", "Ultrafilter Lemma", "Definition:Ultrafilter on Set", "Definition:Convergent Filter", "Adherent Point of Filter iff Superfilter Converges", "Definition:Adherent Point/Filter" ]
proofwiki-6601
Left Distributive and Commutative implies Distributive
Let $\struct {S, \circ, *}$ be an algebraic structure. Let the operation $\circ$ be left distributive over the operation $*$. Let $\circ$ be commutative. Then $\circ$ is distributive over $*$.
Let $a, b, c \in S$. Then {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \paren {a * b} \circ c | r = c \circ \paren {a * b} | c = $\circ$ is commutative }} {{eqn | r = \paren {c \circ a} * \paren {c \circ b} | c = $\circ$ is left distributive over $*$ }} {{eqn | r = \paren {a \circ c} * \paren {b \circ c} | c = $\c...
Let $\struct {S, \circ, *}$ be an [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with Two Operations|algebraic structure]]. Let the [[Definition:Binary Operation|operation]] $\circ$ be [[Definition:Left Distributive Operation|left distributive]] over the [[Definition:Binary Operation|operation]] $*$. Let $\circ$ be [[Definition:Co...
Let $a, b, c \in S$. Then {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \paren {a * b} \circ c | r = c \circ \paren {a * b} | c = $\circ$ is [[Definition:Commutative Operation|commutative]] }} {{eqn | r = \paren {c \circ a} * \paren {c \circ b} | c = $\circ$ is [[Definition:Left Distributive Operation|left distributive]...
Left Distributive and Commutative implies Distributive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Left_Distributive_and_Commutative_implies_Distributive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Left_Distributive_and_Commutative_implies_Distributive
[ "Commutativity", "Distributive Operations" ]
[ "Definition:Algebraic Structure/Two Operations", "Definition:Operation/Binary Operation", "Definition:Distributive Operation/Left", "Definition:Operation/Binary Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Distributive Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Distributive Operation/Left", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Distributive Operation/Right", "Definition:Distributive Operation/Left", "Definition:Distributive Operation/Right", "Definition:Distributive Operation", "Category:Commutativity...
proofwiki-6602
Filter on Product Space Converges iff Projections Converge
Let $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of non-empty topological spaces where $I$ is an arbitrary index set. Let $\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ be the corresponding product space. Let $\pr_i: X \to X_i$ denote the projection from $X$ onto $X_i$. Let $\FF \subset \powerset X$ be a filter on $X...
=== Sufficient Condition === Let $\FF$ converge. Then there is a point $x \in X$ such that $\FF$ converges to $x$. By Filter on Product Space Converges to Point iff Projections Converge to Projections of Point: :$\forall i \in I: \map {\pr_i} \FF$ converges to $x_i$ Thus :$\forall i \in I: \map {\pr_i} \FF$ converges.
Let $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|indexed family]] of [[Definition:Non-Empty Set|non-empty]] [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]] where $I$ is an arbitrary [[Definition:Indexing Set|index set]]. Let $\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ be the corresponding [[Defin...
=== Sufficient Condition === Let $\FF$ converge. Then there is a point $x \in X$ such that $\FF$ converges to $x$. By [[Filter on Product Space Converges to Point iff Projections Converge to Projections of Point]]: :$\forall i \in I: \map {\pr_i} \FF$ converges to $x_i$ Thus :$\forall i \in I: \map {\pr_i} \FF$ con...
Filter on Product Space Converges iff Projections Converge
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Filter_on_Product_Space_Converges_iff_Projections_Converge
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Filter_on_Product_Space_Converges_iff_Projections_Converge
[ "Topology", "Filter Theory", "Projections" ]
[ "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Product Space (Topology)", "Definition:Projection (Mapping Theory)", "Definition:Filter on Set", "Definition:Convergent Filter", "Definition:Image Filter" ]
[ "Filter on Product Space Converges to Point iff Projections Converge to Projections of Point", "Filter on Product Space Converges to Point iff Projections Converge to Projections of Point" ]
proofwiki-6603
Tychonoff's Theorem for Hausdorff Spaces
Let $I$ be an indexing set. Let $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of non-empty Hausdorff spaces. Let $\ds X = \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ be the corresponding product space. Then $X$ is compact {{iff}} each $X_i$ is compact.
First assume that $X$ is compact. From Projection from Product Topology is Continuous, the projections: :$\pr_i : X \to X_i$ are continuous. From Continuous Image of Compact Space is Compact, it follows that the $X_i$ are compact. Assume now that each $X_i$ is compact. From Topological Space is Compact iff Every Ultr...
Let $I$ be an [[Definition:Indexing Set|indexing set]]. Let $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|indexed family]] of [[Definition:Non-Empty Set|non-empty]] [[Definition:Hausdorff Space|Hausdorff spaces]]. Let $\ds X = \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ be the corresponding [[Definition:Produc...
First assume that $X$ is [[Definition:Compact Topological Space|compact]]. From [[Projection from Product Topology is Continuous]], the [[Definition:Projection (Mapping Theory)|projections]]: :$\pr_i : X \to X_i$ are [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|continuous]]. From [[Continuous Image of Compact Space i...
Tychonoff's Theorem for Hausdorff Spaces
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tychonoff's_Theorem_for_Hausdorff_Spaces
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tychonoff's_Theorem_for_Hausdorff_Spaces
[ "Tychonoff's Theorem", "Hausdorff Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:T2 Space", "Definition:Product Space (Topology)", "Definition:Compact Topological Space", "Definition:Compact Topological Space" ]
[ "Definition:Compact Topological Space", "Projection from Product Topology is Continuous", "Definition:Projection (Mapping Theory)", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Continuous Image of Compact Space is Compact", "Definition:Compact Topological Space", "Definition:Compact Topological Space", ...
proofwiki-6604
Filter on Product of Hausdorff Spaces Converges iff Projections Converge
Let $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of non-empty Hausdorff spaces where $I$ is an arbitrary index set. Let $\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ be the corresponding product space. Let $\pr_i: X \to X_i$ denote the projection from $X$ onto $X_i$. Let $\FF \subset \powerset X$ be a filter on $X$....
=== Sufficient Condition === Let $\FF$ converge. Then there is a point $x \in X$ such that $\FF$ converges to $x$. By Filter on Product Space Converges to Point iff Projections Converge to Projections of Point: :$\forall i \in I: \map {\pr_i} \FF$ converges to $x_i$. Thus, for each $i \in I$, $\map {\pr_i} \FF$ converg...
Let $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|indexed family]] of [[Definition:Non-Empty Set|non-empty]] [[Definition:Hausdorff Space|Hausdorff spaces]] where $I$ is an arbitrary [[Definition:Indexing Set|index set]]. Let $\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ be the corresponding [[Definitio...
=== Sufficient Condition === Let $\FF$ converge. Then there is a point $x \in X$ such that $\FF$ converges to $x$. By [[Filter on Product Space Converges to Point iff Projections Converge to Projections of Point]]: :$\forall i \in I: \map {\pr_i} \FF$ converges to $x_i$. Thus, for each $i \in I$, $\map {\pr_i} \FF$...
Filter on Product of Hausdorff Spaces Converges iff Projections Converge
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Filter_on_Product_of_Hausdorff_Spaces_Converges_iff_Projections_Converge
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Filter_on_Product_of_Hausdorff_Spaces_Converges_iff_Projections_Converge
[ "Topology", "Filter Theory", "Projections" ]
[ "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:T2 Space", "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Product Space (Topology)", "Definition:Projection (Mapping Theory)", "Definition:Filter on Set", "Definition:Convergent Filter", "Definition:Image Filter" ]
[ "Filter on Product Space Converges to Point iff Projections Converge to Projections of Point", "Filter on Product Space Converges to Point iff Projections Converge to Projections of Point" ]
proofwiki-6605
Positive Real has Real Square Root
Let $x \in \R_{>0}$ be a (strictly) positive real number. Then: :$\exists y \in \R: x = y^2$
Let $f: \R \to \R$ be defined as: :$\forall x \in \R: \map f x = x^2$ We have that $f$ is the pointwise product of the identity mapping with itself. By Product Rule for Continuous Real Functions and Identity Mapping is Continuous, $f$ is continuous. By Power Function is Unbounded Above: :$\exists q \in \R: \map f q > x...
Let $x \in \R_{>0}$ be a [[Definition:Strictly Positive Real Number|(strictly) positive real number]]. Then: :$\exists y \in \R: x = y^2$
Let $f: \R \to \R$ be defined as: :$\forall x \in \R: \map f x = x^2$ We have that $f$ is the [[Definition:Pointwise Multiplication of Real-Valued Functions|pointwise product]] of the [[Definition:Identity Mapping|identity mapping]] with itself. By [[Product Rule for Continuous Real Functions]] and [[Identity Mapping...
Positive Real has Real Square Root
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Real_has_Real_Square_Root
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Real_has_Real_Square_Root
[ "Real Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Strictly Positive/Real Number" ]
[ "Definition:Pointwise Multiplication of Real-Valued Functions", "Definition:Identity Mapping", "Combination Theorem for Continuous Functions/Real/Product Rule", "Identity Mapping is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Real Function", "Limit at Infinity of x^n", "Intermediate Value Theorem", "Category:...
proofwiki-6606
Join is Idempotent
Let $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ be a join semilattice. Then $\vee$ is idempotent.
Let $a \in S$ be arbitrary. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \vee a | r = \sup \set {a, a} | c = {{Defof|Join (Order Theory)|Join}} }} {{eqn | r = \sup \set a | c = {{Defof|Set}} }} {{eqn | r = a | c = Supremum of Singleton }} {{end-eqn}} Hence the result. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Join Semilattice|join semilattice]]. Then $\vee$ is [[Definition:Idempotent Operation|idempotent]].
Let $a \in S$ be arbitrary. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \vee a | r = \sup \set {a, a} | c = {{Defof|Join (Order Theory)|Join}} }} {{eqn | r = \sup \set a | c = {{Defof|Set}} }} {{eqn | r = a | c = [[Supremum of Singleton]] }} {{end-eqn}} Hence the result. {{qed}}
Join is Idempotent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Join_is_Idempotent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Join_is_Idempotent
[ "Join Operation", "Examples of Idempotence" ]
[ "Definition:Join Semilattice", "Definition:Idempotence/Operation" ]
[ "Supremum of Singleton" ]
proofwiki-6607
Product of Positive Strictly Increasing Mappings is Strictly Increasing
Let $A$ be an ordered set. Let $B$ be an ordered field. Let $f, g: A \to B$ be strictly increasing mappings with positive values. Let $h: A \to B$ be defined by $\map h x = \map f x \map g x$. Then $h$ is strictly increasing.
Let $x, y \in A$ such that $x < y$. If $\map h x = 0$. By the definition of strictly increasing: :$\map f y > \map f x \ge 0$ and: :$\map g y > \map g x \ge 0$ So: :$\map h y > 0 = \map h x$ If $\map h x \ne 0$, then $\map h x > 0$ so: :$\map f x > 0$ and: :$\map g x > 0$ Also: :$\map f x < \map f y$ and: :$\map g x < ...
Let $A$ be an ordered set. Let $B$ be an ordered field. Let $f, g: A \to B$ be strictly increasing mappings with positive values. Let $h: A \to B$ be defined by $\map h x = \map f x \map g x$. Then $h$ is strictly increasing.
Let $x, y \in A$ such that $x < y$. If $\map h x = 0$. By the definition of strictly increasing: :$\map f y > \map f x \ge 0$ and: :$\map g y > \map g x \ge 0$ So: :$\map h y > 0 = \map h x$ If $\map h x \ne 0$, then $\map h x > 0$ so: :$\map f x > 0$ and: :$\map g x > 0$ Also: :$\map f x < \map f y$ and: :$\map ...
Product of Positive Strictly Increasing Mappings is Strictly Increasing
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Positive_Strictly_Increasing_Mappings_is_Strictly_Increasing
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Positive_Strictly_Increasing_Mappings_is_Strictly_Increasing
[]
[]
[]
proofwiki-6608
Supremum of Singleton
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Then for all $a \in S$: :$\sup \set a = a$ where $\sup$ denotes supremum.
Since $a \preceq a$, $a$ is an upper bound of $\set a$. Let $b$ be another upper bound of $\set a$. Then necessarily $a \preceq b$. It follows that indeed: :$\sup \set a = a$ as desired. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Then for all $a \in S$: :$\sup \set a = a$ where $\sup$ denotes [[Definition:Supremum of Set|supremum]].
Since $a \preceq a$, $a$ is an [[Definition:Upper Bound of Set|upper bound]] of $\set a$. Let $b$ be another [[Definition:Upper Bound of Set|upper bound]] of $\set a$. Then necessarily $a \preceq b$. It follows that indeed: :$\sup \set a = a$ as desired. {{qed}}
Supremum of Singleton
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Supremum_of_Singleton
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Supremum_of_Singleton
[ "Suprema", "Singletons" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Supremum of Set" ]
[ "Definition:Upper Bound of Set", "Definition:Upper Bound of Set" ]
proofwiki-6609
Infimum of Singleton
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Then for all $a \in S$: :$\inf \set a = a$ where $\inf$ denotes infimum.
Since $a \preceq a$, $a$ is a lower bound for $\set a$. Let $b$ be another lower bound for $\set a$. Then necessarily $b \preceq a$. It follows that indeed: :$\inf \set a = a$ as desired. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Then for all $a \in S$: :$\inf \set a = a$ where $\inf$ denotes [[Definition:Infimum of Set|infimum]].
Since $a \preceq a$, $a$ is a [[Definition:Lower Bound of Set|lower bound]] for $\set a$. Let $b$ be another lower bound for $\set a$. Then necessarily $b \preceq a$. It follows that indeed: :$\inf \set a = a$ as desired. {{qed}}
Infimum of Singleton
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infimum_of_Singleton
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infimum_of_Singleton
[ "Infima", "Singletons" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Infimum of Set" ]
[ "Definition:Lower Bound of Set" ]
proofwiki-6610
Meet is Idempotent
Let $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ be a meet semilattice. Then $\wedge$ is idempotent.
Let $a \in S$ be arbitrary. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \wedge a | r = \inf \set {a, a} | c = {{Defof|Meet (Order Theory)}} }} {{eqn | r = \inf \set a | c = {{Defof|Set}} }} {{eqn | r = a | c = Infimum of Singleton }} {{end-eqn}} Hence the result. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Meet Semilattice|meet semilattice]]. Then $\wedge$ is [[Definition:Idempotent Operation|idempotent]].
Let $a \in S$ be arbitrary. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a \wedge a | r = \inf \set {a, a} | c = {{Defof|Meet (Order Theory)}} }} {{eqn | r = \inf \set a | c = {{Defof|Set}} }} {{eqn | r = a | c = [[Infimum of Singleton]] }} {{end-eqn}} Hence the result. {{qed}}
Meet is Idempotent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Meet_is_Idempotent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Meet_is_Idempotent
[ "Meet Operation", "Examples of Idempotence" ]
[ "Definition:Meet Semilattice", "Definition:Idempotence/Operation" ]
[ "Infimum of Singleton" ]
proofwiki-6611
GCD from Prime Decomposition
Let $a, b \in \Z$. From Expression for Integers as Powers of Same Primes, let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | r = p_1^{k_1} p_2^{k_2} \ldots p_r^{k_r} }} {{eqn | l = b | r = p_1^{l_1} p_2^{l_2} \ldots p_r^{l_r} }} {{eqn | q = \forall i \in \set {1, 2, \dotsc, r} | l = p_i | o = \divides | r...
Note that if one of the primes $p_i$ does not appear in the prime decompositions of either one of $a$ or $b$, then its corresponding index $k_i$ or $l_i$ will be zero. Let $d \divides a$. Then: :$d$ is of the form $p_1^{h_1} p_2^{h_2} \ldots p_r^{h_r}, \forall i: 1 \le i \le r, 0 \le h_i \le k_i$ :$d \divides a \iff \f...
Let $a, b \in \Z$. From [[Expression for Integers as Powers of Same Primes]], let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | r = p_1^{k_1} p_2^{k_2} \ldots p_r^{k_r} }} {{eqn | l = b | r = p_1^{l_1} p_2^{l_2} \ldots p_r^{l_r} }} {{eqn | q = \forall i \in \set {1, 2, \dotsc, r} | l = p_i | o = \divides ...
Note that if one of the [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]] $p_i$ does not appear in the [[Definition:Prime Decomposition|prime decompositions]] of either one of $a$ or $b$, then its corresponding index $k_i$ or $l_i$ will be [[Definition:Zero (Number)|zero]]. Let $d \divides a$. Then: :$d$ is of the form $p_1^{h_1}...
GCD from Prime Decomposition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/GCD_from_Prime_Decomposition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/GCD_from_Prime_Decomposition
[ "Greatest Common Divisor", "Prime Decompositions", "GCD from Prime Decomposition" ]
[ "Expression for Integers as Powers of Same Primes", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Decomposition", "Definition:Divisor (Algebra)/Integer", "Definition:Greatest Common Divisor/Integers" ]
[ "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Decomposition", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Prime Number" ]
proofwiki-6612
LCM from Prime Decomposition
Let $a, b \in \Z$. From Expression for Integers as Powers of Same Primes, let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | r = p_1^{k_1} p_2^{k_2} \ldots p_r^{k_r} }} {{eqn | l = b | r = p_1^{l_1} p_2^{l_2} \ldots p_r^{l_r} }} {{eqn | q = \forall i \in \set {1, 2, \dotsc, r} | l = p_i | o = \divides | r...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \lcm \set {a, b} | r = \frac {a b} {\gcd \set {a, b} } | c = Product of GCD and LCM }} {{eqn | r = \frac {\paren {p_1^{k_1} p_2^{k_2} \cdots p_r^{k_r} } \paren {p_1^{l_1} p_2^{l_2} \ldots p_r^{l_r} } } {p_1^{\min \set {k_1, l_1} } p_2^{\min \set {k_2, l_2} } \cdots p_r^{\min \set {...
Let $a, b \in \Z$. From [[Expression for Integers as Powers of Same Primes]], let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | r = p_1^{k_1} p_2^{k_2} \ldots p_r^{k_r} }} {{eqn | l = b | r = p_1^{l_1} p_2^{l_2} \ldots p_r^{l_r} }} {{eqn | q = \forall i \in \set {1, 2, \dotsc, r} | l = p_i | o = \divides ...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \lcm \set {a, b} | r = \frac {a b} {\gcd \set {a, b} } | c = [[Product of GCD and LCM]] }} {{eqn | r = \frac {\paren {p_1^{k_1} p_2^{k_2} \cdots p_r^{k_r} } \paren {p_1^{l_1} p_2^{l_2} \ldots p_r^{l_r} } } {p_1^{\min \set {k_1, l_1} } p_2^{\min \set {k_2, l_2} } \cdots p_r^{\min \s...
LCM from Prime Decomposition/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/LCM_from_Prime_Decomposition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/LCM_from_Prime_Decomposition/Proof_1
[ "Lowest Common Multiple", "Prime Numbers", "LCM from Prime Decomposition" ]
[ "Expression for Integers as Powers of Same Primes", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Decomposition", "Definition:Divisor (Algebra)/Integer", "Definition:Lowest Common Multiple/Integers" ]
[ "Product of GCD and LCM", "GCD from Prime Decomposition", "Sum Less Minimum is Maximum" ]
proofwiki-6613
LCM from Prime Decomposition
Let $a, b \in \Z$. From Expression for Integers as Powers of Same Primes, let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | r = p_1^{k_1} p_2^{k_2} \ldots p_r^{k_r} }} {{eqn | l = b | r = p_1^{l_1} p_2^{l_2} \ldots p_r^{l_r} }} {{eqn | q = \forall i \in \set {1, 2, \dotsc, r} | l = p_i | o = \divides | r...
Note that if one of the primes $p_i$ does not appear in the prime decompositions of either one of $a$ or $b$, then its corresponding index $k_i$ or $l_i$ will be zero. Let $a \divides m$. Then: :$m$ is of the form $p_1^{h_1} p_2^{h_2} \ldots p_r^{h_r}, \forall i: 1 \le i \le r, 0 \le k_i \le h_i$ :$a \divides l \iff \f...
Let $a, b \in \Z$. From [[Expression for Integers as Powers of Same Primes]], let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = a | r = p_1^{k_1} p_2^{k_2} \ldots p_r^{k_r} }} {{eqn | l = b | r = p_1^{l_1} p_2^{l_2} \ldots p_r^{l_r} }} {{eqn | q = \forall i \in \set {1, 2, \dotsc, r} | l = p_i | o = \divides ...
Note that if one of the [[Definition:Prime Number|primes]] $p_i$ does not appear in the [[Definition:Prime Decomposition|prime decompositions]] of either one of $a$ or $b$, then its corresponding index $k_i$ or $l_i$ will be [[Definition:Zero (Number)|zero]]. Let $a \divides m$. Then: :$m$ is of the form $p_1^{h_1}...
LCM from Prime Decomposition/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/LCM_from_Prime_Decomposition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/LCM_from_Prime_Decomposition/Proof_2
[ "Lowest Common Multiple", "Prime Numbers", "LCM from Prime Decomposition" ]
[ "Expression for Integers as Powers of Same Primes", "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Decomposition", "Definition:Divisor (Algebra)/Integer", "Definition:Lowest Common Multiple/Integers" ]
[ "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Prime Decomposition", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Prime Number" ]
proofwiki-6614
Product of Positive Element and Element Greater than One
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ, \le}$ be an ordered ring with unity $1_R$ and zero $0_R$. Let $x, y \in R$. Suppose that $x > 0_R$ and $y > 1_R$. Then $x \circ y > x$ and $y \circ x > x$.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = y | o = > | r = 1_R }} {{eqn | l = x \circ y | o = > | r = x \circ 1_R | c = $x > 0_R$, Properties of Ordered Ring: $(6)$ }} {{eqn | l = x \circ y | o = > | r = x | c = {{Defof|Unity of Ring}} }} {{end-eqn}} A similar argument shows that $y \cir...
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ, \le}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Ring|ordered ring]] [[Definition:Ring with Unity|with unity]] $1_R$ and [[Definition:Ring Zero|zero]] $0_R$. Let $x, y \in R$. Suppose that $x > 0_R$ and $y > 1_R$. Then $x \circ y > x$ and $y \circ x > x$.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = y | o = > | r = 1_R }} {{eqn | l = x \circ y | o = > | r = x \circ 1_R | c = $x > 0_R$, [[Properties of Ordered Ring|Properties of Ordered Ring: $(6)$]] }} {{eqn | l = x \circ y | o = > | r = x | c = {{Defof|Unity of Ring}} }} {{end-eqn}} A sim...
Product of Positive Element and Element Greater than One
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Positive_Element_and_Element_Greater_than_One
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Positive_Element_and_Element_Greater_than_One
[ "Ordered Rings" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Ring", "Definition:Ring with Unity", "Definition:Ring Zero" ]
[ "Properties of Ordered Ring", "Category:Ordered Rings" ]
proofwiki-6615
Strictly Positive Power of Strictly Positive Element Greater than One Succeeds Element
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ, \le}$ be an ordered ring with unity. Let $x \in R$ with $x > 1$ and $x > 0$. Let $n \in \N_{>0}$. Then: :$\circ^n x \ge x$
The proof proceeds by induction: If $n = 1$, then $\circ^n x = x$. So: :$\circ^n x \ge x$ Suppose that $\circ^n x \ge x$. Then since $x > 1$: :$\circ^n x > 1$ By Product of Positive Element and Element Greater than One: :$x \circ \paren {\circ^n x} > x$ Hence: :$\circ^{n + 1} x \ge x$ {{qed}} Category:Ordered Rings gns...
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ, \le}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Ring|ordered ring]] [[Definition:Ring with Unity|with unity]]. Let $x \in R$ with $x > 1$ and $x > 0$. Let $n \in \N_{>0}$. Then: :$\circ^n x \ge x$
The proof proceeds by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]]: If $n = 1$, then $\circ^n x = x$. So: :$\circ^n x \ge x$ Suppose that $\circ^n x \ge x$. Then since $x > 1$: :$\circ^n x > 1$ By [[Product of Positive Element and Element Greater than One]]: :$x \circ \paren {\circ^n x} > x$ Hence: :$\circ^{...
Strictly Positive Power of Strictly Positive Element Greater than One Succeeds Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Strictly_Positive_Power_of_Strictly_Positive_Element_Greater_than_One_Succeeds_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Strictly_Positive_Power_of_Strictly_Positive_Element_Greater_than_One_Succeeds_Element
[ "Ordered Rings" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Ring", "Definition:Ring with Unity" ]
[ "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Product of Positive Element and Element Greater than One", "Category:Ordered Rings" ]
proofwiki-6616
Directed Set has Strict Successors iff Unbounded Above
Let $\struct {S, \le}$ be a directed set. Then every element of $S$ has a strict successor in $S$ {{iff}} $S$ has no upper bound in $S$.
=== Necessary Condition === Suppose that each element of $S$ has a strict successor in $S$. If $x$ is any element of $S$, then $x$ has a strict successor. Therefore, $x$ is not an upper bound of $S$. {{qed|lemma}}
Let $\struct {S, \le}$ be a [[Definition:Directed Set|directed set]]. Then every element of $S$ has a [[Definition:Strict Successor|strict successor]] in $S$ {{iff}} $S$ has no [[Definition:Upper Bound of Set|upper bound]] in $S$.
=== Necessary Condition === Suppose that each element of $S$ has a [[Definition:Strict Successor|strict successor]] in $S$. If $x$ is any element of $S$, then $x$ has a [[Definition:Strict Successor|strict successor]]. Therefore, $x$ is not an [[Definition:Upper Bound of Set|upper bound]] of $S$. {{qed|lemma}}
Directed Set has Strict Successors iff Unbounded Above
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Directed_Set_has_Strict_Successors_iff_Unbounded_Above
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Directed_Set_has_Strict_Successors_iff_Unbounded_Above
[ "Order Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Directed Preordering", "Definition:Strictly Succeed", "Definition:Upper Bound of Set" ]
[ "Definition:Strictly Succeed", "Definition:Strictly Succeed", "Definition:Upper Bound of Set", "Definition:Upper Bound of Set", "Definition:Upper Bound of Set", "Definition:Upper Bound of Set", "Definition:Strictly Succeed" ]
proofwiki-6617
Complex Numbers are Uncountable
The set of complex numbers $\C$ is uncountably infinite.
For all $r \in \R$, we have $r = r + 0 i \in C$. Thus the set of real numbers $\R$ can be considered a subset of $\C$. As the Real Numbers are Uncountable, it follows from Sufficient Conditions for Uncountability, proposition $(1)$, that $\C$ is uncountably infinite. {{qed}} Category:Complex Numbers Category:Set Theory...
The [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Complex Number|complex numbers]] $\C$ is [[Definition:Uncountable Set|uncountably infinite]].
For all $r \in \R$, we have $r = r + 0 i \in C$. Thus the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]] $\R$ can be considered a [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $\C$. As the [[Real Numbers are Uncountable]], it follows from [[Sufficient Conditions for Uncountability]], proposition $(1)$, that $\C$...
Complex Numbers are Uncountable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Numbers_are_Uncountable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Numbers_are_Uncountable
[ "Complex Numbers", "Set Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Uncountable/Set" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Subset", "Real Numbers are Uncountably Infinite", "Sufficient Conditions for Uncountability", "Definition:Uncountable/Set", "Category:Complex Numbers", "Category:Set Theory" ]
proofwiki-6618
Infimum of Infima
Let $\left({S, \preceq}\right)$ be an ordered set. Let $\mathbb T$ be a collection of subsets of $S$. Suppose all $T \in \mathbb T$ admit an infimum $\inf T$ in $S$. Then: :$\inf \bigcup \mathbb T = \inf \left\{{\inf T: T \in \mathbb T}\right\}$ as soon as one of these two quantities exists.
Suppose that $s = \inf \bigcup \mathbb T \in S$. By Set is Subset of Union, $T \subseteq \bigcup \mathbb T$ for all $T \in \mathbb T$. Hence by Infimum of Subset: :$\forall T \in \mathbb T: s \preceq \inf T$ Suppose now that $a \in S$ satisfies: :$\forall T \in \mathbb T: a \preceq \inf T$ Then by transitivity of $\pre...
Let $\left({S, \preceq}\right)$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $\mathbb T$ be a collection of [[Definition:Subset|subsets]] of $S$. Suppose all $T \in \mathbb T$ admit an [[Definition:Infimum of Set|infimum]] $\inf T$ in $S$. Then: :$\inf \bigcup \mathbb T = \inf \left\{{\inf T: T \in \mathbb T}...
Suppose that $s = \inf \bigcup \mathbb T \in S$. By [[Set is Subset of Union]], $T \subseteq \bigcup \mathbb T$ for all $T \in \mathbb T$. Hence by [[Infimum of Subset]]: :$\forall T \in \mathbb T: s \preceq \inf T$ Suppose now that $a \in S$ satisfies: :$\forall T \in \mathbb T: a \preceq \inf T$ Then by [[Defi...
Infimum of Infima
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infimum_of_Infima
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infimum_of_Infima
[ "Order Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Infimum of Set" ]
[ "Set is Subset of Union", "Infimum of Subset", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Infimum of Set", "Definition:Infimum of Set", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Infimum of Set", "Category:Order Theory" ]
proofwiki-6619
Join Semilattice is Ordered Structure
Let $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ be a join semilattice. Then $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ is an ordered structure. That is, $\preceq$ is compatible with $\vee$.
For $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ to be an ordered structure is equivalent to, for all $a, b, c \in S$: :$a \preceq b \implies a \vee c \preceq b \vee c$ :$a \preceq b \implies c \vee a \preceq c \vee b$ Since Join is Commutative, it suffices to prove the first of these implications. By definition of join: :$a \vee c = ...
Let $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Join Semilattice|join semilattice]]. Then $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ is an [[Definition:Ordered Structure|ordered structure]]. That is, $\preceq$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\vee$.
For $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ to be an [[Definition:Ordered Structure|ordered structure]] is equivalent to, for all $a, b, c \in S$: :$a \preceq b \implies a \vee c \preceq b \vee c$ :$a \preceq b \implies c \vee a \preceq c \vee b$ Since [[Join is Commutative]], it suffices to prove the first of these implication...
Join Semilattice is Ordered Structure/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Join_Semilattice_is_Ordered_Structure
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Join_Semilattice_is_Ordered_Structure/Proof_1
[ "Join Semilattices", "Ordered Structures", "Join Semilattice is Ordered Structure" ]
[ "Definition:Join Semilattice", "Definition:Ordered Structure", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Structure", "Join is Commutative", "Definition:Join (Order Theory)", "Definition:Supremum of Set", "Join Succeeds Operands", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Upper Bound of Set", "Definition:Supremum of Set" ]
proofwiki-6620
Join Semilattice is Ordered Structure
Let $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ be a join semilattice. Then $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ is an ordered structure. That is, $\preceq$ is compatible with $\vee$.
Let $a, b, c \in S$. Let $a \preceq b$. By the definition of join semilattice: :$a \vee b = b$ Thus: :$\paren {a \vee b} \vee c = b \vee c$ Since $\vee$ is associative, commutative, and idempotent: :$\paren {a \vee c} \vee \paren {b \vee c} = b \vee c$ Therefore, $a \vee c \preceq b \vee c$. From Join is Commutative, w...
Let $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Join Semilattice|join semilattice]]. Then $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ is an [[Definition:Ordered Structure|ordered structure]]. That is, $\preceq$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\vee$.
Let $a, b, c \in S$. Let $a \preceq b$. By the definition of [[Definition:Join Semilattice|join semilattice]]: :$a \vee b = b$ Thus: :$\paren {a \vee b} \vee c = b \vee c$ Since $\vee$ is [[Definition:Associative Operation|associative]], [[Definition:Commutative Operation|commutative]], and [[Definition:Idempotent ...
Join Semilattice is Ordered Structure/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Join_Semilattice_is_Ordered_Structure
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Join_Semilattice_is_Ordered_Structure/Proof_2
[ "Join Semilattices", "Ordered Structures", "Join Semilattice is Ordered Structure" ]
[ "Definition:Join Semilattice", "Definition:Ordered Structure", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Join Semilattice", "Definition:Associative Operation", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Idempotence/Operation", "Join is Commutative" ]
proofwiki-6621
Meet Semilattice is Ordered Structure
Let $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ be a meet semilattice. Then $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ is an ordered structure.
For $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ to be an ordered structure is equivalent to, for all $a,b,c \in S$: :$a \preceq b \implies a \wedge c \preceq b \wedge c$ :$a \preceq b \implies c \wedge a \preceq c \wedge b$ Since Meet is Commutative, it suffices to prove the first of these implications. By definition of meet: :$b \...
Let $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Meet Semilattice|meet semilattice]]. Then $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ is an [[Definition:Ordered Structure|ordered structure]].
For $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ to be an [[Definition:Ordered Structure|ordered structure]] is equivalent to, for all $a,b,c \in S$: :$a \preceq b \implies a \wedge c \preceq b \wedge c$ :$a \preceq b \implies c \wedge a \preceq c \wedge b$ Since [[Meet is Commutative]], it suffices to prove the first of these imp...
Meet Semilattice is Ordered Structure
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Meet_Semilattice_is_Ordered_Structure
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Meet_Semilattice_is_Ordered_Structure
[ "Meet Semilattices", "Ordered Structures" ]
[ "Definition:Meet Semilattice", "Definition:Ordered Structure" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Structure", "Meet is Commutative", "Definition:Meet (Order Theory)", "Definition:Infimum of Set", "Meet Precedes Operands", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Lower Bound of Set", "Definition:Infimum of Set" ]
proofwiki-6622
Join Semilattice is Semilattice
Let $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ be a join semilattice. Then $\struct {S, \vee}$ is a semilattice.
Recall the definition of join semilattice: {{:Definition:Join Semilattice}} By definition of join semilattice, $\vee$ is closed. The other three defining properties for a semilattice follow respectively from: :Join is Commutative :Join is Associative :Join is Idempotent Hence $\struct {S, \vee}$ is a semilattice. {{qed...
Let $\struct {S, \vee, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Join Semilattice|join semilattice]]. Then $\struct {S, \vee}$ is a [[Definition:Semilattice|semilattice]].
Recall the definition of [[Definition:Join Semilattice|join semilattice]]: {{:Definition:Join Semilattice}} By definition of [[Definition:Join Semilattice|join semilattice]], $\vee$ is [[Definition:Closed Operation|closed]]. The other three defining properties for a [[Definition:Semilattice|semilattice]] follow respe...
Join Semilattice is Semilattice
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Join_Semilattice_is_Semilattice
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Join_Semilattice_is_Semilattice
[ "Join Semilattices", "Semilattices" ]
[ "Definition:Join Semilattice", "Definition:Semilattice" ]
[ "Definition:Join Semilattice", "Definition:Join Semilattice", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Semilattice", "Join is Commutative", "Join is Associative", "Join is Idempotent", "Definition:Semilattice" ]
proofwiki-6623
Meet Semilattice is Semilattice
Let $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ be a meet semilattice. Then $\struct {S, \wedge}$ is a semilattice.
By definition of meet semilattice, $\wedge$ is closed. The other three defining properties for a semilattice follow respectively from: :Meet is Commutative :Meet is Associative :Meet is Idempotent Hence $\struct {S, \wedge}$ is a semilattice. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \wedge, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Meet Semilattice|meet semilattice]]. Then $\struct {S, \wedge}$ is a [[Definition:Semilattice|semilattice]].
By definition of [[Definition:Meet Semilattice|meet semilattice]], $\wedge$ is [[Definition:Closed Operation|closed]]. The other three defining properties for a [[Definition:Semilattice|semilattice]] follow respectively from: :[[Meet is Commutative]] :[[Meet is Associative]] :[[Meet is Idempotent]] Hence $\struct {S...
Meet Semilattice is Semilattice
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Meet_Semilattice_is_Semilattice
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Meet_Semilattice_is_Semilattice
[ "Meet Semilattices", "Semilattices" ]
[ "Definition:Meet Semilattice", "Definition:Semilattice" ]
[ "Definition:Meet Semilattice", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Semilattice", "Meet is Commutative", "Meet is Associative", "Meet is Idempotent", "Definition:Semilattice" ]
proofwiki-6624
Semilattice Induces Ordering
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a semilattice. Let $\RR$ be the relation on $S$ defined by, for all $a, b \in S$: :$a \mathrel \RR b$ {{iff}} $a \circ b = b$ Then $\RR$ is an ordering.
Let us verify that $\RR$ satisfies the three conditions for an ordering.
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Semilattice|semilattice]]. Let $\RR$ be the [[Definition:Relation|relation]] on $S$ defined by, for all $a, b \in S$: :$a \mathrel \RR b$ {{iff}} $a \circ b = b$ Then $\RR$ is an [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]].
Let us verify that $\RR$ satisfies the three conditions for an [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]].
Semilattice Induces Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Semilattice_Induces_Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Semilattice_Induces_Ordering
[ "Semilattices" ]
[ "Definition:Semilattice", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Ordering" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering", "Definition:Ordering" ]
proofwiki-6625
Elementary Row Operations Associate with Matrix Multiplication
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a commutative ring. Let $\mathbf A = \sqbrk a_{m n}$ be an $m \times n$ matrix over $R$. Let $\mathbf B = \sqbrk b_{n p}$ be an $n \times p$ matrix over $R$. Let $\hat o_1, \ldots, \hat o_{\hat n}$ be a finite sequence of elementary row operations that can be performed on a matrix over $R...
Proof by induction over $\hat n \in \N$, the number of elementary row operations.
Let $\struct {R, +, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Commutative Operation|commutative]] [[Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)|ring]]. Let $\mathbf A = \sqbrk a_{m n}$ be an [[Definition:Matrix|$m \times n$ matrix]] over $R$. Let $\mathbf B = \sqbrk b_{n p}$ be an [[Definition:Matrix|$n \times p$ matrix]] over $R$. Let $\h...
Proof by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]] over $\hat n \in \N$, the number of [[Definition:Elementary Row Operation|elementary row operations]].
Elementary Row Operations Associate with Matrix Multiplication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Elementary_Row_Operations_Associate_with_Matrix_Multiplication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Elementary_Row_Operations_Associate_with_Matrix_Multiplication
[ "Elementary Row Operations", "Conventional Matrix Multiplication", "Commutativity" ]
[ "Definition:Commutative/Operation", "Definition:Ring (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Matrix", "Definition:Matrix", "Definition:Finite Sequence", "Definition:Elementary Operation/Row", "Definition:Matrix/Row", "Definition:Matrix Product (Conventional)" ]
[ "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Elementary Operation/Row", "Definition:Elementary Operation/Row", "Definition:Elementary Operation/Row" ]
proofwiki-6626
Union of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a closed algebraic structure. Let $\FF$ be a family of relations on $S$. Let each element of $\FF$ be compatible with $\circ$. Let $\QQ = \bigcup \FF$. Then $Q$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$.
Let $x, y, z \in S$. Let $x \mathrel \QQ y$. Then for some $\RR \in \FF$: :$x \mathrel \RR y$. Since $\RR$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$: :$\tuple {x \circ z} \mathrel \RR \tuple {y \circ z}$ Since $\RR \in \FF$: :$\RR \subseteq \bigcup \FF = \QQ$ Thus :$\tuple {x \circ z} \mathrel \QQ \tuple {y \circ z}$ We h...
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Closed Algebraic Structure|closed algebraic structure]]. Let $\FF$ be a family of [[Definition:Endorelation|relations]] on $S$. Let each element of $\FF$ be [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible with $\circ$]]. Let $\QQ = \bigcup \FF$. Then $Q$ is a [...
Let $x, y, z \in S$. Let $x \mathrel \QQ y$. Then for some $\RR \in \FF$: :$x \mathrel \RR y$. Since $\RR$ is a [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|relation compatible with $\circ$]]: :$\tuple {x \circ z} \mathrel \RR \tuple {y \circ z}$ Since $\RR \in \FF$: :$\RR \subseteq \bigcup \FF = \QQ$ Thus :$\...
Union of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Relations_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Relations_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
[ "Compatible Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Category:Compatible Relations" ]
proofwiki-6627
Complement of Relation Compatible with Group is Compatible
Let $\struct {G, \circ}$ be a group. Let $\RR$ be a relation on $G$. Let $\RR$ be compatible with $\circ$. Let $\QQ = \complement_{G \times G} \RR$, so that: :$\forall a, b \in G: a \mathrel \QQ b \iff \neg \paren {a \mathrel \RR b}$ Then $\QQ$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$.
Let $x, y, z \in G$. Suppose that $\neg \paren {\paren {x \circ z} \mathrel \QQ \paren {y \circ z} }$. Then by the definition of $\QQ$: :$\paren {x \circ z} \mathrel \RR \paren {y \circ z}$ Because $\RR$ is compatible with $\circ$: :$\paren {x \circ z} \circ z^{-1} \mathrel \RR \paren {y \circ z} \circ z^{-1}$ By {{Gro...
Let $\struct {G, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Group|group]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $G$. Let $\RR$ be [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Let $\QQ = \complement_{G \times G} \RR$, so that: :$\forall a, b \in G: a \mathrel \QQ b \iff \neg \paren {a \...
Let $x, y, z \in G$. Suppose that $\neg \paren {\paren {x \circ z} \mathrel \QQ \paren {y \circ z} }$. Then by the definition of $\QQ$: :$\paren {x \circ z} \mathrel \RR \paren {y \circ z}$ Because $\RR$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$: :$\paren {x \circ z} \circ z^{-1} ...
Complement of Relation Compatible with Group is Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complement_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Group_is_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complement_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Group_is_Compatible
[ "Compatible Relations", "Group Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Group", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Rule of Transposition", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Category:Compatible Relations", "Category:Group Theory" ]
proofwiki-6628
Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible
$\RR$ is strongly compatible with $\circ$: :$\forall x, y, z \in G:$ ::$x \mathrel \RR y \iff x \circ z \mathrel \RR y \circ z$ ::$x \mathrel \RR y \iff z \circ x \mathrel \RR z \circ y$
Since $\RR$ is compatible with $\circ$: :$\forall a, b, c \in G: a \mathrel \RR b \implies a \circ c \mathrel \RR b \circ c$ In particular, letting $a = x$, $b = y$, and $c = z$, we see that: :$x \mathrel \RR y \implies x \circ z \mathrel \RR y \circ z$ On the other hand, letting $a = x \circ z$, $b = y \circ z$, and $...
$\RR$ is [[Definition:Relation Strongly Compatible with Operation|strongly compatible]] with $\circ$: :$\forall x, y, z \in G:$ ::$x \mathrel \RR y \iff x \circ z \mathrel \RR y \circ z$ ::$x \mathrel \RR y \iff z \circ x \mathrel \RR z \circ y$
Since $\RR$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$: :$\forall a, b, c \in G: a \mathrel \RR b \implies a \circ c \mathrel \RR b \circ c$ In particular, letting $a = x$, $b = y$, and $c = z$, we see that: :$x \mathrel \RR y \implies x \circ z \mathrel \RR y \circ z$ On the oth...
Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible
[ "Relations Compatible with Group Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Relation Strongly Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Associative Operation", "Definition:Inverse (Abstract Algebra)/Inverse", "Definition:Relation Strongly Compatible with Operation", "Category:Relations Compatible with Group Operation" ]
proofwiki-6629
Intersection of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a closed algebraic structure. Let $\mathscr F$ be a indexed family of relations on $S$. Suppose that each element of $\mathscr F$ is compatible with $\circ$. Let $\QQ = \bigcap \mathscr F$ be the intersection of $\mathscr F$. Then $\QQ$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$.
Let $x, y, z \in S$. Suppose that $x \mathrel \QQ y$. Then for each $\RR \in \mathscr F$: :$x \mathrel \RR y$ Then since $\RR$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$: :$\paren {x \circ z} \mathrel \RR \paren {y \circ z}$ Since this holds for each $\RR \in \mathscr F$: :$\paren {x \circ z} \mathrel \QQ \paren {y \circ z}...
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Closed Algebraic Structure|closed algebraic structure]]. Let $\mathscr F$ be a [[Definition:Indexed Family|indexed family]] of [[Definition:Endorelation|relations]] on $S$. Suppose that each element of $\mathscr F$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatibl...
Let $x, y, z \in S$. Suppose that $x \mathrel \QQ y$. Then for each $\RR \in \mathscr F$: :$x \mathrel \RR y$ Then since $\RR$ is a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$: :$\paren {x \circ z} \mathrel \RR \paren {y \circ z}$ Since this holds for...
Intersection of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_of_Relations_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_of_Relations_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
[ "Compatible Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Set Intersection/Family of Sets", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Category:Compatible Relations" ]
proofwiki-6630
Inverse of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a closed algebraic structure. Let $\RR$ be a relation on $S$ which is compatible with $\circ$. Let $\QQ$ be the inverse relation of $\RR$. Then $\QQ$ is compatible with $\circ$.
Let $x, y, z \in S$. Suppose that $x \mathrel \QQ y$. Then by the definition of $\QQ$: :$y \mathrel \RR x$. Since $\RR$ is compatible with $\circ$: :$\paren {y \circ z} \mathrel \RR \paren {x \circ z}$ and :$\paren {z \circ y} \mathrel \RR \paren {z \circ x}$ Thus by the definition of $\QQ$: :$\paren {x \circ z} \mathr...
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Closed Algebraic Structure|closed algebraic structure]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $S$ which is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Let $\QQ$ be the [[Definition:Inverse Relation|inverse relation]] of $\RR$....
Let $x, y, z \in S$. Suppose that $x \mathrel \QQ y$. Then by the definition of $\QQ$: :$y \mathrel \RR x$. Since $\RR$ is compatible with $\circ$: :$\paren {y \circ z} \mathrel \RR \paren {x \circ z}$ and :$\paren {z \circ y} \mathrel \RR \paren {z \circ x}$ Thus by the definition of $\QQ$: :$\paren {x \circ z} \m...
Inverse of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inverse_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inverse_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
[ "Compatible Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Inverse Relation" ]
[ "Category:Compatible Relations" ]
proofwiki-6631
Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y, z \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \preccurlyeq y \circ z }} {{eqn | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = z \circ x \preccurlyeq z \circ y }} {{eqn | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \prec y \circ z }} {{eq...
By definition of ordered group, $\preccurlyeq$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$. Thus by Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \preccurlyeq y \circ z }} {{eqn | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff |...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y, z \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \preccurlyeq y \circ z }} {{eqn | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = z \circ x \preccurlyeq z \circ y }} {{eqn | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \prec y \circ z }} {{eq...
By definition of [[Definition:Ordered Group|ordered group]], $\preccurlyeq$ is a [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|relation compatible with $\circ$]]. Thus by [[Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = x \c...
Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible
[ "Ordered Groups", "Compatible Relations", "Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible", "Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Relation Compatible with Group ...
proofwiki-6632
Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y, z \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \preccurlyeq y \circ z }} {{eqn | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = z \circ x \preccurlyeq z \circ y }} {{eqn | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \prec y \circ z }} {{eq...
By the definition of an ordered group, $\preccurlyeq$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$. Thus by {{Corollary|Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible}}, we obtain the first four results. By Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible, $\prec$ is compatible wi...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y, z \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \preccurlyeq y \circ z }} {{eqn | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = z \circ x \preccurlyeq z \circ y }} {{eqn | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \prec y \circ z }} {{eq...
By the definition of an [[Definition:Ordered Group|ordered group]], $\preccurlyeq$ is a [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|relation compatible]] with $\circ$. Thus by {{Corollary|Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible}}, we obtain the first four results. By [[Reflexive Reduction...
Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible/Corollary/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible/Corollary/Proof_1
[ "Ordered Groups", "Compatible Relations", "Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
proofwiki-6633
Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y, z \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \preccurlyeq y \circ z }} {{eqn | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = z \circ x \preccurlyeq z \circ y }} {{eqn | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \prec y \circ z }} {{eq...
Each result follows from Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible. For example, by Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible: :$x \preccurlyeq y \iff x \circ x^{-1} \preccurlyeq y \circ x^{-1}$ Since $x \circ x^{-1} = e$: :$x \preccurlyeq y \iff e \preccurlyeq y \circ x^{-1}...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y, z \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \preccurlyeq y \circ z }} {{eqn | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = z \circ x \preccurlyeq z \circ y }} {{eqn | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = x \circ z \prec y \circ z }} {{eq...
Each result follows from [[Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible]]. For example, by [[Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible]]: :$x \preccurlyeq y \iff x \circ x^{-1} \preccurlyeq y \circ x^{-1}$ Since $x \circ x^{-1} = e$: :$x \preccurlyeq y \iff e \preccurlyeq y ...
Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible/Corollary/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible/Corollary/Proof_2
[ "Ordered Groups", "Compatible Relations", "Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible" ]
[]
[ "Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible", "Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible" ]
proofwiki-6634
Relations Compatible with Operation Form Complete Distributive Lattice
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be an algebraic structure. Let $C$ be the set of relations on $S$ compatible with $\circ$. Then $\struct {C, \cap, \cup, \subseteq}$ is a complete distributive lattice.
{{ProofWanted}} Category:Compatible Relations Category:Complete Lattices Category:Distributive Lattices poocmfwwi4z2mb95eaedgnbgag5sxt3
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be an [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with One Operation|algebraic structure]]. Let $C$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Endorelation|relations]] on $S$ compatible with $\circ$. Then $\struct {C, \cap, \cup, \subseteq}$ is a [[Definition:Complete Distributive Lattice|complete d...
{{ProofWanted}} [[Category:Compatible Relations]] [[Category:Complete Lattices]] [[Category:Distributive Lattices]] poocmfwwi4z2mb95eaedgnbgag5sxt3
Relations Compatible with Operation Form Complete Distributive Lattice
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relations_Compatible_with_Operation_Form_Complete_Distributive_Lattice
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relations_Compatible_with_Operation_Form_Complete_Distributive_Lattice
[ "Compatible Relations", "Complete Lattices", "Distributive Lattices" ]
[ "Definition:Algebraic Structure/One Operation", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Complete Distributive Lattice" ]
[ "Category:Compatible Relations", "Category:Complete Lattices", "Category:Distributive Lattices" ]
proofwiki-6635
Relations Compatible with Group Form Complete Boolean Algebra
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a group. Let $C$ be the set of relations on $S$ which are compatible with $\circ$. Then $\struct {C, \cap, \cup, \subseteq}$ is a complete Boolean lattice.
{{ProofWanted}} Category:Compatible Relations Category:Complete Lattices Category:Boolean Lattices tbnnoumtcegy19fm00qmai3k9d785za
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Group|group]]. Let $C$ be the set of [[Definition:Endorelation|relations]] on $S$ which are [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Then $\struct {C, \cap, \cup, \subseteq}$ is a [[Definition:Complete Boolean Lattice|complete Boolean latti...
{{ProofWanted}} [[Category:Compatible Relations]] [[Category:Complete Lattices]] [[Category:Boolean Lattices]] tbnnoumtcegy19fm00qmai3k9d785za
Relations Compatible with Group Form Complete Boolean Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relations_Compatible_with_Group_Form_Complete_Boolean_Algebra
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relations_Compatible_with_Group_Form_Complete_Boolean_Algebra
[ "Compatible Relations", "Complete Lattices", "Boolean Lattices" ]
[ "Definition:Group", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Complete Boolean Lattice" ]
[ "Category:Compatible Relations", "Category:Complete Lattices", "Category:Boolean Lattices" ]
proofwiki-6636
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 3
:$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {p \implies r}$
Let us use the following abbreviations: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \phi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies q | c = }} {{eqn | l = \psi | o = \text{ for } | r = q \implies r | c = }} {{eqn | l = \chi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies r | c = }} {{end-eqn}} {{Beg...
:$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {p \implies r}$
Let us use the following abbreviations: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \phi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies q | c = }} {{eqn | l = \psi | o = \text{ for } | r = q \implies r | c = }} {{eqn | l = \chi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies r | c = }} {{end-eqn}} {{...
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 3/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_3/Proof_1
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-6637
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 3
:$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {p \implies r}$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connective is true for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|ccccccc|c|ccc|} \hline ((p & \implies & q) & \land & (q & \implies & r)) & \implies & (p & \implies & r) \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T &...
:$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {p \implies r}$
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]] is [[Definition:True|true]] for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|...
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 3/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_3/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6638
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 4
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
Let us use the following abbreviations {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \phi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies q }} {{eqn | l = \psi | o = \text{ for } | r = q \implies r }} {{eqn | l = \chi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies r }} {{end-eqn}} {{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies q} \implies...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
Let us use the following abbreviations {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \phi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies q }} {{eqn | l = \psi | o = \text{ for } | r = q \implies r }} {{eqn | l = \chi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies r }} {{end-eqn}} {{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies q} \impl...
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 4/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_4
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_4/Proof_1
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism" ]
[]
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 3", "Rule of Exportation" ]
proofwiki-6639
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 4
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{Assumption|1|p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{Assumption|3|q \implies r}} {{ModusPonens|4|1,2|q|1|2}} {{ModusPonens|5|1,2,3|r|3|4}} {{Implication|6|1,3|p \implies r|2|5}} {{Implication|7|1|\paren {q \imp...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{Assumption|1|p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{Assumption|3|q \implies r}} {{ModusPonens|4|1,2|q|1|2}} {{ModusPonens|5|1,2,3|r|3|4}} {{Implication|6|1,3|p \implies r|2|5}} {{Implication|7|1|\paren {q \imp...
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 4/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_4
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_4/Proof_2
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-6640
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 4
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }|instance 1 of a Hilbert proof system}} {{Assumption|1|p}} {{Assumption|2|p \implies q}} {{ModusPonens|3|1, 2|q|1|2}} {{Assumption|4|q \implies r}} {{ModusPonens|5|1, 2, 4|r|3|4}} {{TableauLine|n = 6 | p...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }|[[Definition:Hilbert Proof System/Instance 1|instance 1 of a Hilbert proof system]]}} {{Assumption|1|p}} {{Assumption|2|p \implies q}} {{ModusPonens|3|1, 2|q|1|2}} {{Assumption|4|q \implies r}} {{ModusPon...
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 4/Proof 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_4
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_4/Proof_3
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Hilbert Proof System/Instance 1", "Definition:Assumption", "Definition:Discharged Assumption", "Definition:Assumption", "Definition:Discharged Assumption", "Definition:Assumption", "Definition:Discharged Assumption" ]
proofwiki-6641
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 5
:$\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
Let us use the following abbreviations {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \phi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies q | c = }} {{eqn | l = \psi | o = \text{ for } | r = q \implies r | c = }} {{eqn | l = \chi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies r | c = }} {{end-eqn}} From H...
:$\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
Let us use the following abbreviations {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \phi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies q | c = }} {{eqn | l = \psi | o = \text{ for } | r = q \implies r | c = }} {{eqn | l = \chi | o = \text{ for } | r = p \implies r | c = }} {{end-eqn}} Fro...
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 5/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_5
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_5/Proof_1
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism" ]
[]
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 3", "Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 3", "Rule of Exportation" ]
proofwiki-6642
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 5
:$\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau |\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }|Instance 2 of the Hilbert-style systems}} {{TableauLine | n = 1 | f = \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \lor q} \implies \paren {p \lor r} } | rlnk = Definition:Hilbert Proof System/Ins...
:$\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau |\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }|[[Definition:Hilbert Proof System/Instance 2|Instance 2 of the Hilbert-style systems]]}} {{TableauLine | n = 1 | f = \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \lor q} \implies \paren {p \lor r} ...
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 5/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_5
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_5/Proof_2
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Hilbert Proof System/Instance 2" ]
proofwiki-6643
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 5
:$\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{Assumption|1|q \implies r}} {{Assumption|2|p \implies q}} {{Assumption|3|p}} {{ModusPonens|4|2,3|q|2|3}} {{ModusPonens|5|1,2,3|r|1|4}} {{Implication|6|1,2|p \implies r|3|5}} {{Implication|7|1|\paren ...
:$\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {q \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{Assumption|1|q \implies r}} {{Assumption|2|p \implies q}} {{Assumption|3|p}} {{ModusPonens|4|2,3|q|2|3}} {{ModusPonens|5|1,2,3|r|1|4}} {{Implication|6|1,2|p \implies r|3|5}} {{Implication|7|1|\paren ...
Hypothetical Syllogism/Formulation 5/Proof 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_5
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Hypothetical_Syllogism/Formulation_5/Proof_3
[ "Hypothetical Syllogism" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-6644
Duality Principle (Order Theory)/Global Duality
The following are equivalent: :$(1): \quad \Sigma$ is true for all ordered sets :$(2): \quad \Sigma^*$ is true for all ordered sets
=== $(1)$ implies $(2)$ === Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $\struct {S, \succeq}$ be its dual. By assumption, $\Sigma$ is true for $\struct {S, \succeq}$. By Local Duality, this implies $\Sigma^*$ is true for $\struct {S, \preceq}$. Since $\struct {S, \preceq}$ was arbitrary, the result follows. {{qe...
The following are [[Definition:Logical Equivalence|equivalent]]: :$(1): \quad \Sigma$ is true for all [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered sets]] :$(2): \quad \Sigma^*$ is true for all [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered sets]]
=== $(1)$ implies $(2)$ === Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $\struct {S, \succeq}$ be its [[Definition:Dual Ordered Set|dual]]. By assumption, $\Sigma$ is true for $\struct {S, \succeq}$. By [[Duality Principle (Order Theory)/Local Duality|Local Duality]], this implies $...
Duality Principle (Order Theory)/Global Duality
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Duality_Principle_(Order_Theory)/Global_Duality
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Duality_Principle_(Order_Theory)/Global_Duality
[ "Order Theory", "Named Theorems" ]
[ "Definition:Logical Equivalence", "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Ordered Set" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Dual Ordering/Dual Ordered Set", "Duality Principle (Order Theory)/Local Duality" ]
proofwiki-6645
Duality Principle (Order Theory)/Local Duality
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set, and let $\struct {S, \succeq}$ be its dual. Then the following are equivalent: :$(1): \quad \Sigma$ is true for $\struct {S, \preceq}$ :$(2): \quad \Sigma^*$ is true for $\struct {S, \succeq}$
=== $(1)$ implies $(2)$ === By assumption, $\Sigma$ is true for $\struct {S, \preceq}$. By Dual of Dual Ordering, the dual statement $\Sigma^*$ applied to $\struct {S, \succeq}$ is the same as $\Sigma$ applied to $\struct {S, \preceq}$. Hence $\Sigma^*$ is true for $\struct {S, \succeq}$. {{qed|lemma}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]], and let $\struct {S, \succeq}$ be its [[Definition:Dual Ordered Set|dual]]. Then the following are [[Definition:Logical Equivalence|equivalent]]: :$(1): \quad \Sigma$ is true for $\struct {S, \preceq}$ :$(2): \quad \Sigma^*$ is true for $\struc...
=== $(1)$ implies $(2)$ === By assumption, $\Sigma$ is true for $\struct {S, \preceq}$. By [[Dual of Dual Ordering]], the [[Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)|dual statement]] $\Sigma^*$ applied to $\struct {S, \succeq}$ is the same as $\Sigma$ applied to $\struct {S, \preceq}$. Hence $\Sigma^*$ is true for $...
Duality Principle (Order Theory)/Local Duality
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Duality_Principle_(Order_Theory)/Local_Duality
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Duality_Principle_(Order_Theory)/Local_Duality
[ "Order Theory", "Named Theorems" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Dual Ordering/Dual Ordered Set", "Definition:Logical Equivalence" ]
[ "Dual of Dual Ordering", "Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)", "Dual of Dual Ordering" ]
proofwiki-6646
Diagonal Complement Relation Compatible with Group Operation
Let $\left({G, \circ}\right)$ be a group. Let $\Delta_G$ be the diagonal relation on $G$. Then $\Delta_G^c = \complement_{G \times G} \Delta_G$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$. {{explain|Find another way to write the above, it's ugly}} In other words, $\ne$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$.
By Diagonal Relation is Universally Compatible, $\Delta_G$ is compatible with $\circ$. By Complement of Relation Compatible with Group is Compatible , $\Delta_G^c$ is also compatible with $\circ$. {{qed}} Category:Compatible Relations n07d4bm10j5n1oe24z8vocmgjasgc45
Let $\left({G, \circ}\right)$ be a [[Definition:Group|group]]. Let $\Delta_G$ be the [[Definition:Diagonal Relation|diagonal relation]] on $G$. Then $\Delta_G^c = \complement_{G \times G} \Delta_G$ is a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. {{expl...
By [[Diagonal Relation is Universally Compatible]], $\Delta_G$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. By [[Complement of Relation Compatible with Group is Compatible ]], $\Delta_G^c$ is also compatible with $\circ$. {{qed}} [[Category:Compatible Relations]] n07d4bm10j5n1oe24z8vo...
Diagonal Complement Relation Compatible with Group Operation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Diagonal_Complement_Relation_Compatible_with_Group_Operation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Diagonal_Complement_Relation_Compatible_with_Group_Operation
[ "Compatible Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Group", "Definition:Diagonal Relation", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Diagonal Relation is Universally Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Complement of Relation Compatible with Group is Compatible ", "Category:Compatible Relations" ]
proofwiki-6647
Reflexive Closure of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a magma. Let $\RR$ be a relation on $S$ which is compatible with $\circ$. Let $\RR^=$ be the reflexive closure of $\prec$. That is, $\RR^=$ is defined as the union of $\RR$ with the diagonal relation for $S$. Then $\RR^=$ is compatible with $\circ$.
By Diagonal Relation is Universally Compatible, the diagonal relation is compatible with $\circ$. Then by Union of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible, $\RR^=$ is compatible with $\circ$. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Magma|magma]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $S$ which is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Let $\RR^=$ be the [[Definition:Reflexive Closure|reflexive closure]] of $\prec$. That is, $\RR^=$ is defined as th...
By [[Diagonal Relation is Universally Compatible]], the [[Definition:Diagonal Relation|diagonal relation]] is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Then by [[Union of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible]], $\RR^=$ is compatible with $\circ$. {{qed}}
Reflexive Closure of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Closure_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Closure_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
[ "Compatible Relations", "Reflexive Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Magma", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Reflexive Closure", "Definition:Diagonal Relation" ]
[ "Diagonal Relation is Universally Compatible", "Definition:Diagonal Relation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Union of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible" ]
proofwiki-6648
Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a group. Let $\RR$ be a relation on $S$ which is compatible with $\circ$. Let $\RR^\ne$ be the reflexive reduction of $\RR$. Then $\RR^\ne$ is compatible with $\circ$.
From the Cancellation Laws, $\circ$ is a cancellable operation. The result then follows directly from Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Cancellable Operation is Compatible. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Group|group]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $S$ which is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Let $\RR^\ne$ be the [[Definition:Reflexive Reduction|reflexive reduction]] of $\RR$. Then $\RR^\ne$ is [[Definitio...
From the [[Cancellation Laws]], $\circ$ is a [[Definition:Cancellable Operation|cancellable operation]]. The result then follows directly from [[Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Cancellable Operation is Compatible]]. {{qed}}
Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Reduction_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Reduction_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Compatible/Proof_2
[ "Compatible Relations", "Reflexive Reductions", "Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible" ]
[ "Definition:Group", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Reflexive Reduction", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Cancellation Laws", "Definition:Cancellable Operation", "Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Cancellable Operation is Compatible" ]
proofwiki-6649
Double Negation Elimination implies Law of Excluded Middle
Let the Law of Double Negation Elimination be supposed to hold: :$\neg \neg p \vdash p$ Then the Law of Excluded Middle likewise holds: :$\vdash p \lor \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|p \lor \neg p}} {{Assumption |1|\neg \paren {p \lor \neg p}|Assume the contrary}} {{Assumption |2|p|Assume one disjunct}} {{Addition |3|2|p \lor \neg p|2|1}} {{NonContradiction |4|1, 2|3|1}} {{Contradiction |5|1|\neg p|2|4|demonstrating a contradiction}} {{Addit...
Let the [[Double Negation Elimination|Law of Double Negation Elimination]] be supposed to hold: :$\neg \neg p \vdash p$ Then the [[Law of Excluded Middle]] likewise holds: :$\vdash p \lor \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|p \lor \neg p}} {{Assumption |1|\neg \paren {p \lor \neg p}|Assume the contrary}} {{Assumption |2|p|Assume one disjunct}} {{Addition |3|2|p \lor \neg p|2|1}} {{NonContradiction |4|1, 2|3|1}} {{Contradiction |5|1|\neg p|2|4|demonstrating a contradiction}} {{Addit...
Double Negation Elimination implies Law of Excluded Middle/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation_Elimination_implies_Law_of_Excluded_Middle
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation_Elimination_implies_Law_of_Excluded_Middle/Proof_1
[ "Double Negation Elimination implies Law of Excluded Middle", "Double Negation Elimination", "Double Negation" ]
[ "Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination", "Law of Excluded Middle" ]
[]
proofwiki-6650
Double Negation Elimination implies Law of Excluded Middle
Let the Law of Double Negation Elimination be supposed to hold: :$\neg \neg p \vdash p$ Then the Law of Excluded Middle likewise holds: :$\vdash p \lor \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \lor \neg p}} {{TheoremIntro|1|\neg\neg (p \lor \neg p)|Negation of Excluded Middle is False: Form 2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|2||p \lor \neg p|1}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
Let the [[Double Negation Elimination|Law of Double Negation Elimination]] be supposed to hold: :$\neg \neg p \vdash p$ Then the [[Law of Excluded Middle]] likewise holds: :$\vdash p \lor \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \lor \neg p}} {{TheoremIntro|1|\neg\neg (p \lor \neg p)|[[Negation of Excluded Middle is False/Form 2|Negation of Excluded Middle is False: Form 2]]}} {{DoubleNegElimination|2||p \lor \neg p|1}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
Double Negation Elimination implies Law of Excluded Middle/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation_Elimination_implies_Law_of_Excluded_Middle
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation_Elimination_implies_Law_of_Excluded_Middle/Proof_2
[ "Double Negation Elimination implies Law of Excluded Middle", "Double Negation Elimination", "Double Negation" ]
[ "Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination", "Law of Excluded Middle" ]
[ "Negation of Excluded Middle is False/Form 2" ]
proofwiki-6651
Double Negation/Double Negation Introduction/Sequent Form/Formulation 2
:$\vdash p \implies \neg \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \implies \neg \neg p}} {{Assumption|1|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|2|1|\neg \neg p|1}} {{Implication|3||p \implies \neg \neg p|1|2}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
:$\vdash p \implies \neg \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \implies \neg \neg p}} {{Assumption|1|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|2|1|\neg \neg p|1}} {{Implication|3||p \implies \neg \neg p|1|2}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
Double Negation/Double Negation Introduction/Sequent Form/Formulation 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Double_Negation_Introduction/Sequent_Form/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Double_Negation_Introduction/Sequent_Form/Formulation_2
[ "Double Negation Introduction" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-6652
Dual of Dual Ordering
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $\struct {S, \succeq}$ be its dual. Then the dual of $\struct {S, \succeq}$ is again $\struct {S, \preceq}$.
Denote with $\preceq'$ the dual of $\succeq$. By definition of dual ordering, we thus have for all $a, b \in S$: :$a \preceq b$ {{iff}} $b \succeq a$ :$b \succeq a$ {{iff}} $a \preceq' b$ Hence $a \preceq b$ {{iff}} $a \preceq' b$. The result follows from Equality of Relations. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $\struct {S, \succeq}$ be its [[Definition:Dual Ordered Set|dual]]. Then the [[Definition:Dual Ordered Set|dual]] of $\struct {S, \succeq}$ is again $\struct {S, \preceq}$.
Denote with $\preceq'$ the [[Definition:Dual Ordering|dual]] of $\succeq$. By definition of [[Definition:Dual Ordering|dual ordering]], we thus have for all $a, b \in S$: :$a \preceq b$ {{iff}} $b \succeq a$ :$b \succeq a$ {{iff}} $a \preceq' b$ Hence $a \preceq b$ {{iff}} $a \preceq' b$. The result follows from [...
Dual of Dual Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Dual_of_Dual_Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Dual_of_Dual_Ordering
[ "Dual Orderings" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Dual Ordering/Dual Ordered Set", "Definition:Dual Ordering/Dual Ordered Set" ]
[ "Definition:Dual Ordering", "Definition:Dual Ordering", "Equality of Relations" ]
proofwiki-6653
Dual of Dual Statement (Order Theory)
Let $\Sigma$ be a statement about ordered sets. Let $\Sigma^*$ be its dual statement. Then $\Sigma$ is also the dual statement of $\Sigma^*$.
By definition, the dual statement $\Sigma^*$ is formed by replacing the ordering $\preceq$ with its dual $\succeq$. By Dual of Dual Ordering, applying this operation twice results in the original sentence $\Sigma$ again. {{qed}} Category:Order Theory sgenggbsvmbmw7wypp9g6hrj4lesfpe
Let $\Sigma$ be a [[Definition:Statement|statement]] about [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered sets]]. Let $\Sigma^*$ be its [[Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)|dual statement]]. Then $\Sigma$ is also the [[Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)|dual statement]] of $\Sigma^*$.
By definition, the [[Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)|dual statement]] $\Sigma^*$ is formed by replacing the [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]] $\preceq$ with its [[Definition:Dual Ordering|dual]] $\succeq$. By [[Dual of Dual Ordering]], applying this operation twice results in the original sentence $\Sigma$ aga...
Dual of Dual Statement (Order Theory)
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Dual_of_Dual_Statement_(Order_Theory)
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Dual_of_Dual_Statement_(Order_Theory)
[ "Order Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Statement", "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)", "Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)", "Definition:Ordering", "Definition:Dual Ordering", "Dual of Dual Ordering", "Category:Order Theory" ]
proofwiki-6654
Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination/Sequent Form/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \neg \neg p \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \neg \neg p \implies p}} {{Assumption|1|\neg \neg p}} {{DoubleNegElimination|2|1|p|1}} {{Implication|3||\neg \neg p \implies p|1|2}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
:$\vdash \neg \neg p \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \neg \neg p \implies p}} {{Assumption|1|\neg \neg p}} {{DoubleNegElimination|2|1|p|1}} {{Implication|3||\neg \neg p \implies p|1|2}} {{EndTableau|qed}}
Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination/Sequent Form/Formulation 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Double_Negation_Elimination/Sequent_Form/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Double_Negation_Elimination/Sequent_Form/Formulation_2
[ "Double Negation Elimination" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-6655
Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination
The '''rule of double negation elimination''' is a valid argument in certain types of logic dealing with negation $\neg$. This includes classical propositional logic and predicate logic, and in particular natural deduction, but for example not intuitionistic propositional logic.
{{BeginTableau|\neg \neg p \vdash p}} {{Premise|1|\neg \neg p}} {{ExcludedMiddle|2|p \lor \neg p}} {{Assumption|3|p}} {{Assumption|4|\neg p}} {{NonContradiction|5|1, 4|4|1}} {{Explosion|6|1, 4|p|5}} {{ProofByCases|7|1|p|2|3|3|4|6}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
The '''rule of [[Double Negation Elimination|double negation elimination]]''' is a [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid argument]] in certain types of [[Definition:Logic|logic]] dealing with [[Definition:Logical Not|negation]] $\neg$. This includes [[Definition:Classical Propositional Logic|classical propositional logic]...
{{BeginTableau|\neg \neg p \vdash p}} {{Premise|1|\neg \neg p}} {{ExcludedMiddle|2|p \lor \neg p}} {{Assumption|3|p}} {{Assumption|4|\neg p}} {{NonContradiction|5|1, 4|4|1}} {{Explosion|6|1, 4|p|5}} {{ProofByCases|7|1|p|2|3|3|4|6}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination/Sequent Form/Formulation 1/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Double_Negation_Elimination
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Double_Negation_Elimination/Sequent_Form/Formulation_1/Proof
[ "Double Negation Elimination", "Double Negation" ]
[ "Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination", "Definition:Valid Argument", "Definition:Logic", "Definition:Logical Not", "Definition:Classical Propositional Logic", "Definition:Predicate Logic", "Definition:Natural Deduction", "Definition:Intuitionistic Propositional Logic" ]
[]
proofwiki-6656
Double Negation/Formulation 1
:$p \dashv \vdash \neg \neg p$
=== Double Negation Introduction === {{:Double Negation/Double Negation Introduction/Sequent Form/Formulation 1/Proof}} === Double Negation Elimination === {{:Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination/Sequent Form/Formulation 1/Proof}}
:$p \dashv \vdash \neg \neg p$
=== [[Double Negation/Double Negation Introduction/Sequent Form/Formulation 1/Proof|Double Negation Introduction]] === {{:Double Negation/Double Negation Introduction/Sequent Form/Formulation 1/Proof}} === [[Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination/Sequent Form/Formulation 1/Proof|Double Negation Elimination]] === ...
Double Negation/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Double Negation" ]
[]
[ "Double Negation/Double Negation Introduction/Sequent Form/Formulation 1/Proof", "Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination/Sequent Form/Formulation 1/Proof" ]
proofwiki-6657
Double Negation/Formulation 1
:$p \dashv \vdash \neg \neg p$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, appropriate truth values match for both boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|c||ccc|} \hline p & \neg & \neg & p \\ \hline \F & \F & \T & \F \\ \T & \T & \F & \T \\ \hline \end {array}$</nowiki> Hence: :$p \dashv \vdash...
:$p \dashv \vdash \neg \neg p$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, appropriate [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] match for both [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|c||ccc|} \hline p & \neg & \neg & p \\ \hline \F & \F & \T & \F \\ \T &...
Double Negation/Formulation 1/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Formulation_1/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Double Negation" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6658
Double Negation/Formulation 2
:$\vdash p \iff \neg \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \iff \neg \neg p}} {{TheoremIntro|1|p \implies \neg \neg p|Double Negation Introduction: Formulation 2}} {{TheoremIntro|2|\neg \neg p \implies p|Double Negation Elimination: Formulation 2}} {{BiconditionalIntro|3||p \iff \neg \neg p|1|2}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed}}
:$\vdash p \iff \neg \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \iff \neg \neg p}} {{TheoremIntro|1|p \implies \neg \neg p|[[Double Negation/Double Negation Introduction/Sequent Form/Formulation 2|Double Negation Introduction: Formulation 2]]}} {{TheoremIntro|2|\neg \neg p \implies p|[[Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination/Sequent Form/Formulation 2|Do...
Double Negation/Formulation 2/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Formulation_2/Proof_1
[ "Double Negation" ]
[]
[ "Double Negation/Double Negation Introduction/Sequent Form/Formulation 2", "Double Negation/Double Negation Elimination/Sequent Form/Formulation 2" ]
proofwiki-6659
Double Negation/Formulation 2
:$\vdash p \iff \neg \neg p$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connective are true for all boolean interpretations. $\quad \begin{array}{|c|c|ccc|} \hline p & \iff & \neg & \neg & p \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \T & \F \\ \T & \T & \T & \F & \T \\ \hline \end{array}$ {...
:$\vdash p \iff \neg \neg p$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connective]] are [[Definition:True|true]] for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. $\qua...
Double Negation/Formulation 2/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Double_Negation/Formulation_2/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Double Negation" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6660
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1
A statement and its contrapositive have the same truth value: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a tableau proof is $\textrm {TP}$.
{{BeginTableau|p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p}} {{Premise|1|p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg p|1|2}} {{Implication|4|1|\neg q \implies \neg p|2|3}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
A [[Definition:Statement|statement]] and its [[Definition:Contrapositive Statement|contrapositive]] have the same [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]]: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a [[Definition:Tableau Proof (Formal Systems)|tableau proof]] is $\textrm {TP}$.
{{BeginTableau|p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p}} {{Premise|1|p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg p|1|2}} {{Implication|4|1|\neg q \implies \neg p|2|3}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[ "Definition:Statement", "Definition:Contrapositive Statement", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Tableau Proof (Natural Deduction)" ]
[]
proofwiki-6661
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1
A statement and its contrapositive have the same truth value: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a tableau proof is $\textrm {TP}$.
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the truth value under the main connectives match for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|ccc|ccccc|} \hline p & \implies & q & \neg & q & \implies & \neg & p \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T & \T & \F \\ \F & ...
A [[Definition:Statement|statement]] and its [[Definition:Contrapositive Statement|contrapositive]] have the same [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]]: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a [[Definition:Tableau Proof (Formal Systems)|tableau proof]] is $\textrm {TP}$.
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connectives]] match for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|c...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[ "Definition:Statement", "Definition:Contrapositive Statement", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Tableau Proof (Natural Deduction)" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6662
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1
A statement and its contrapositive have the same truth value: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a tableau proof is $\textrm {TP}$.
=== Proof of Forward Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof 1}} === Proof of Reverse Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof 1}}
A [[Definition:Statement|statement]] and its [[Definition:Contrapositive Statement|contrapositive]] have the same [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]]: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a [[Definition:Tableau Proof (Formal Systems)|tableau proof]] is $\textrm {TP}$.
=== [[Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof 1|Proof of Forward Implication]] === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof 1}} === [[Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof 1|Proof of Reverse Implication]] === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/R...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[ "Definition:Statement", "Definition:Contrapositive Statement", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Tableau Proof (Natural Deduction)" ]
[ "Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof 1", "Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof 1" ]
proofwiki-6663
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1
A statement and its contrapositive have the same truth value: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a tableau proof is $\textrm {TP}$.
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connectives match for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|ccc||ccccc|} \hline p & \implies & q & \neg & q & \implies & \neg & p \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T & \T & \F \\ \F ...
A [[Definition:Statement|statement]] and its [[Definition:Contrapositive Statement|contrapositive]] have the same [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]]: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a [[Definition:Tableau Proof (Formal Systems)|tableau proof]] is $\textrm {TP}$.
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. 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]]. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[ "Definition:Statement", "Definition:Contrapositive Statement", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Tableau Proof (Natural Deduction)" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6664
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1
A statement and its contrapositive have the same truth value: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a tableau proof is $\textrm {TP}$.
{{BeginTableau|\neg q \implies \neg p \vdash p \implies q}} {{Premise|1|\neg q \implies \neg p}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg p|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|3}} {{DoubleNegElimination|5|1, 2|q|4}} {{Implication|6|1|p \implies q|2|5}} {{EndTableau|Qed}}
A [[Definition:Statement|statement]] and its [[Definition:Contrapositive Statement|contrapositive]] have the same [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]]: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a [[Definition:Tableau Proof (Formal Systems)|tableau proof]] is $\textrm {TP}$.
{{BeginTableau|\neg q \implies \neg p \vdash p \implies q}} {{Premise|1|\neg q \implies \neg p}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg p|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|3}} {{DoubleNegElimination|5|1, 2|q|4}} {{Implication|6|1|p \implies q|2|5}} {{EndTableau|Qed}}
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[ "Definition:Statement", "Definition:Contrapositive Statement", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Tableau Proof (Natural Deduction)" ]
[]
proofwiki-6665
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1
A statement and its contrapositive have the same truth value: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a tableau proof is $\textrm {TP}$.
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the truth value under the main connectives match for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|ccccc|ccc|} \hline \neg & q & \implies & \neg & p & p & \implies & q \\ \hline \T & \F & \T & \T & \F & \F & \T & \F \\ \F & ...
A [[Definition:Statement|statement]] and its [[Definition:Contrapositive Statement|contrapositive]] have the same [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]]: :$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$ Its abbreviation in a [[Definition:Tableau Proof (Formal Systems)|tableau proof]] is $\textrm {TP}$.
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connectives]] match for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|c...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[ "Definition:Statement", "Definition:Contrapositive Statement", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Tableau Proof (Natural Deduction)" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6666
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Proof 1
:$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$
=== Proof of Forward Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof 1}} === Proof of Reverse Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof 1}}
:$p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies \neg p$
=== [[Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof 1|Proof of Forward Implication]] === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof 1}} === [[Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof 1|Proof of Reverse Implication]] === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/R...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1/Proof_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof 1", "Rule of Transposition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof 1" ]
proofwiki-6667
Positive Infinity is Maximal
Let $\struct {\overline \R, \le}$ be the extended real numbers with the usual ordering. Then $+\infty$ is a maximal element of $\overline \R$.
By the definition of the usual ordering on the extended real numbers: :${\le} = {\le_\R} \cup \set {\tuple {x, +\infty}: x \in \overline \R} \cup \set {\tuple {-\infty, x}: x \in \overline \R}$ Suppose $x \in \overline \R$ and $+\infty \le x$. That is: : $\tuple {+\infty, x} \in {\le}$ By the definition of union, $\tup...
Let $\struct {\overline \R, \le}$ be the [[Definition:Extended Real Number Line|extended real numbers]] with the [[Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers|usual ordering]]. Then $+\infty$ is a [[Definition:Maximal Element|maximal element]] of $\overline \R$.
By the definition of the [[Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers|usual ordering]] on the [[Definition:Extended Real Number Line|extended real numbers]]: :${\le} = {\le_\R} \cup \set {\tuple {x, +\infty}: x \in \overline \R} \cup \set {\tuple {-\infty, x}: x \in \overline \R}$ Suppose $x \in \overline \R$ and $...
Positive Infinity is Maximal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Infinity_is_Maximal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Infinity_is_Maximal
[ "Order Theory", "Extended Real Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Extended Real Number Line", "Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers", "Definition:Maximal/Element" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers", "Definition:Extended Real Number Line", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Extended Real Number Line", "Definition:Maximal/Element" ]
proofwiki-6668
Negative Infinity is Minimal
Let $\struct {\overline \R, \le}$ be the extended real numbers with the usual ordering. Then $-\infty$ is a minimal element of $\overline \R$.
By the definition of the usual ordering on the extended real numbers: :${\le} = {\le_\R} \cup \set {\tuple {x, +\infty}: x \in \overline \R} \cup \set {\tuple {-\infty, x}: x \in \overline \R}$ Suppose $x \in \overline \R$ and $x \le -\infty$. That is: :$\tuple {x, -\infty} \in {\le}$ By the definition of union, $\tupl...
Let $\struct {\overline \R, \le}$ be the [[Definition:Extended Real Number Line|extended real numbers]] with the [[Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers|usual ordering]]. Then $-\infty$ is a [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal element]] of $\overline \R$.
By the definition of the [[Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers|usual ordering]] on the [[Definition:Extended Real Number Line|extended real numbers]]: :${\le} = {\le_\R} \cup \set {\tuple {x, +\infty}: x \in \overline \R} \cup \set {\tuple {-\infty, x}: x \in \overline \R}$ Suppose $x \in \overline \R$ and $...
Negative Infinity is Minimal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Negative_Infinity_is_Minimal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Negative_Infinity_is_Minimal
[ "Order Theory", "Extended Real Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Extended Real Number Line", "Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers", "Definition:Minimal/Element" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers", "Definition:Extended Real Number Line", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Extended Real Number Line", "Definition:Minimal/Element" ]
proofwiki-6669
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group/Corollary
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x | o = \iff | r = x^{-1} \preccurlyeq e }} {{eqn | l = x \prec e | o = \iff | r = e \prec x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \prec x | o = \iff ...
By Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x | o = \iff | r = x^{-1} \preccurlyeq e^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = x \prec e | o = \iff ...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x | o = \iff | r = x^{-1} \preccurlyeq e }} {{eqn | l = x \prec e | o = \iff | r = e \prec x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \prec x | o = \iff ...
By [[Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x | o = \iff | r = x^{-1} \preccurlyeq e^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = x \prec e | o = \iff ...
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group/Corollary/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group/Corollary/Proof_1
[ "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group" ]
[]
[ "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group" ]
proofwiki-6670
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group/Corollary
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x | o = \iff | r = x^{-1} \preccurlyeq e }} {{eqn | l = x \prec e | o = \iff | r = e \prec x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \prec x | o = \iff ...
By the definition of an ordered group, $\preccurlyeq$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$. Thus by Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation: Corollary: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x ...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x | o = \iff | r = x^{-1} \preccurlyeq e }} {{eqn | l = x \prec e | o = \iff | r = e \prec x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \prec x | o = \iff ...
By the definition of an [[Definition:Ordered Group|ordered group]], $\preccurlyeq$ is a relation [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Thus by [[Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation/Corollary|Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation: Corollary]]: {{begin-...
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group/Corollary/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group/Corollary/Proof_2
[ "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation/Corollary", "Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible", "Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation/Corollary" ]
proofwiki-6671
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = e \prec y^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in S | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = y^{-1} \prec x^{-1} }} {{end-eqn}}
By the definition of an ordered group, $\preceq$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$. Thus by Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation, we obtain the first result: :$x \preccurlyeq y \iff y^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1}$ By Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible, $\prec$ i...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = e \prec y^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in S | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = y^{-1} \prec x^{-1} }} {{end-eqn}}
By the definition of an [[Definition:Ordered Group|ordered group]], $\preceq$ is a relation [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Thus by [[Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation]], we obtain the first result: :$x \preccurlyeq y \iff y^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1}$ By [...
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group
[ "Ordered Groups", "Inversion Mappings", "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation", "Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible", "Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation" ]
proofwiki-6672
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = e \prec y^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in S | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = y^{-1} \prec x^{-1} }} {{end-eqn}}
By Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x | o = \iff | r = x^{-1} \preccurlyeq e^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = x \prec e | o = \iff ...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = e \prec y^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in S | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = y^{-1} \prec x^{-1} }} {{end-eqn}}
By [[Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x | o = \iff | r = x^{-1} \preccurlyeq e^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = x \prec e | o = \iff ...
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group/Corollary/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group/Corollary/Proof_1
[ "Ordered Groups", "Inversion Mappings", "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group" ]
[]
[ "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group" ]
proofwiki-6673
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = e \prec y^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in S | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = y^{-1} \prec x^{-1} }} {{end-eqn}}
By the definition of an ordered group, $\preccurlyeq$ is a relation compatible with $\circ$. Thus by Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation: Corollary: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq e | o = \iff | r = e \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | l = e \preccurlyeq x ...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in G | l = x \preccurlyeq y | o = \iff | r = e \prec y^{-1} \preccurlyeq x^{-1} }} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y \in S | l = x \prec y | o = \iff | r = y^{-1} \prec x^{-1} }} {{end-eqn}}
By the definition of an [[Definition:Ordered Group|ordered group]], $\preccurlyeq$ is a relation [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Thus by [[Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation/Corollary|Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation: Corollary]]: {{begin-...
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group/Corollary/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group/Corollary/Proof_2
[ "Ordered Groups", "Inversion Mappings", "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation/Corollary", "Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible", "Inverses of Elements Related by Compatible Relation/Corollary" ]
proofwiki-6674
Operating on Transitive Relationships Compatible with Operation
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a magma. Let $\RR$ be a transitive relation on $S$ which is compatible with $\circ$. Let $\RR^=$ be the reflexive closure of $\RR$. Let $x, y, z, w \in S$. Then the following implications hold: $(1): \quad$ If $x \mathrel \RR y$ and $z \mathrel \RR w$, then $x \circ z \mathrel \RR y \circ w$...
We will prove $(1)$ and $(2)$. $(3)$ can be proven using precisely the same argument as $(2)$ and $(4)$ follows from $(1)$. Suppose that $x \mathrel \RR y$ and $z \mathrel \RR w$. By the definition of compatibility: :$x \mathrel \RR y \implies x \circ z \mathrel \RR y \circ z$ :$z \mathrel \RR w \implies y \circ z \mat...
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Magma|magma]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive relation]] on $S$ which is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Let $\RR^=$ be the [[Definition:Reflexive Closure|reflexive closure]] of $\RR$. Let $x, y, z, w \i...
We will prove $(1)$ and $(2)$. $(3)$ can be proven using precisely the same argument as $(2)$ and $(4)$ follows from $(1)$. Suppose that $x \mathrel \RR y$ and $z \mathrel \RR w$. By the definition of [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatibility]]: :$x \mathrel \RR y \implies x \circ z \mathrel \RR ...
Operating on Transitive Relationships Compatible with Operation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Operating_on_Transitive_Relationships_Compatible_with_Operation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Operating_on_Transitive_Relationships_Compatible_with_Operation
[ "Compatible Relations", "Transitive Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Magma", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Reflexive Closure" ]
[ "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Reflexive Closure of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Extended Transitivity", "Reflexive Closure of Rel...
proofwiki-6675
Operating on Ordered Group Inequalities
If $x \prec y$ and $z \prec w$, then $x \circ z \prec y \circ w$. If $x \prec y$ and $z \preccurlyeq w$, then $x \circ z \prec y \circ w$. If $x \preccurlyeq y$ and $z \prec w$, then $x \circ z \prec y \circ w$. If $x \preccurlyeq y$ and $z \preccurlyeq w$, then $x \circ z \preccurlyeq y \circ w$.
Because: :$\struct {G, \circ, \preccurlyeq}$ is a group :$\preccurlyeq$ is compatible with $\circ$ it follows from Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible that $\prec$ is compatible with $\circ$ . By the definition of an ordering, $\preccurlyeq$ is transitive and antisymmetric. The...
If $x \prec y$ and $z \prec w$, then $x \circ z \prec y \circ w$. If $x \prec y$ and $z \preccurlyeq w$, then $x \circ z \prec y \circ w$. If $x \preccurlyeq y$ and $z \prec w$, then $x \circ z \prec y \circ w$. If $x \preccurlyeq y$ and $z \preccurlyeq w$, then $x \circ z \preccurlyeq y \circ w$.
Because: :$\struct {G, \circ, \preccurlyeq}$ is a [[Definition:Ordered Group|group]] :$\preccurlyeq$ is compatible with $\circ$ it follows from [[Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible]] that $\prec$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$ . ...
Operating on Ordered Group Inequalities
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Operating_on_Ordered_Group_Inequalities
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Operating_on_Ordered_Group_Inequalities
[ "Ordered Groups" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Ordering", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Reflexive Reduction of Transitive Antisymmetric Rel...
proofwiki-6676
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
{{BeginTableau |\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p} }} {{Assumption |1|p \implies q}} {{Assumption |2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens |3|1, 2|\neg p|1|2}} {{Implication |4|1|\neg q \implies \neg p|2|3}} {{Implication |5||\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}|1|4}...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
{{BeginTableau |\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p} }} {{Assumption |1|p \implies q}} {{Assumption |2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens |3|1, 2|\neg p|1|2}} {{Implication |4|1|\neg q \implies \neg p|2|3}} {{Implication |5||\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}|1|4}...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-6677
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the truth value under the main connective is true for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|ccc|c|ccccc|} \hline (p & \implies & q) & \implies & (\neg & q & \implies & \neg & p) \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \T & \T & \F ...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connective]] is [[Definition:True|true]] for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowik...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6678
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
=== Proof of Forward Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof 1}} === Proof of Reverse Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof 1}}
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
=== [[Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof 1|Proof of Forward Implication]] === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof 1}} === [[Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof 1|Proof of Reverse Implication]] === {{:Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/R...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof 1", "Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof 1" ]
proofwiki-6679
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connectives match for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|ccc|c|ccccc|} \hline (p & \implies & q) & \iff & (\neg & q & \implies & \neg & p) \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \T & \T & \F & \T &...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. 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]]. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|cc...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6680
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \implies q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg q \implies \neg p}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg p|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|3}} {{DoubleNegElimination|5|1, 2|q|4}} {{Implication|6|1|p \implies q|2|5}} {{Implication|7||\paren...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \implies q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg q \implies \neg p}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg p|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|3}} {{DoubleNegElimination|5|1, 2|q|4}} {{Implication|6|1|p \implies q|2|5}} {{Implication|7||\paren...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-6681
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the truth value under the main connective is is true for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin {array} {|ccccc|c|ccc|} \hline (\neg & q & \implies & \neg & p) & \implies & (p & \implies & q) \\ \hline \T & \F & \T & \T & \F & ...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies \neg p}$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connective]] is is [[Definition:True|true]] for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<no...
Rule of Transposition/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6682
Complex Modulus is Norm
The complex modulus is a norm on the set of complex numbers $\C$.
We prove the norm axioms.
The [[Definition:Complex Modulus|complex modulus]] is a [[Definition:Norm on Division Ring|norm]] on the [[Definition:Complex Number|set of complex numbers]] $\C$.
We prove the [[Definition:Norm on Division Ring|norm axioms]].
Complex Modulus is Norm
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Modulus_is_Norm
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Modulus_is_Norm
[ "Examples of Norms", "Complex Modulus" ]
[ "Definition:Complex Modulus", "Definition:Norm/Division Ring", "Definition:Complex Number" ]
[ "Definition:Norm/Division Ring" ]
proofwiki-6683
Set Difference of Relations Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible
Let $\struct {G, \circ}$ be a group. Let $\RR, \QQ$ be relations on $G$ which are compatible with $\circ$. Then the difference $\RR \setminus \QQ$ is compatible with $\circ$.
By Complement of Relation Compatible with Group is Compatible, $\relcomp {G \times G} \QQ$ is compatible with $\circ$. Thus by Intersection of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible, $\RR \cap \relcomp {G \times G} \QQ$ is compatible with $\circ$. But: :$\RR \cap \relcomp {G \times G} \QQ = \RR \setminus \QQ...
Let $\struct {G, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Group|group]]. Let $\RR, \QQ$ be [[Definition:Endorelation|relations]] on $G$ which are [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Then the [[Definition:Set Difference|difference]] $\RR \setminus \QQ$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with ...
By [[Complement of Relation Compatible with Group is Compatible]], $\relcomp {G \times G} \QQ$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Thus by [[Intersection of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible]], $\RR \cap \relcomp {G \times G} \QQ$ is [[Definition:Relation Compa...
Set Difference of Relations Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Difference_of_Relations_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Difference_of_Relations_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Compatible
[ "Compatible Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Group", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Set Difference", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Complement of Relation Compatible with Group is Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Intersection of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Category:Compatible Relations" ]
proofwiki-6684
Transitive Relation Compatible with Semigroup Operation Relates Powers of Related Elements
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a semigroup. Let $\RR$ be a transitive relation on $S$ which is compatible with $\circ$. Let $x, y \in S$ such that $x \mathrel \RR y$. Let $n \in \N_{>0}$ be a strictly positive integer. Then: :$x^n \mathrel \RR y^n$ where $x^n$ is the $n$th power of $x$.
We proceed by mathematical induction. By definition of power: :$x^1 = x$ :$y^1 = y$ Hence, by assumption: :$x^1 \mathrel \RR y^1$ Suppose now that for $n \ge 1$: :$x^n \mathrel \RR y^n$ Recall the assumption that $x \mathrel \RR y$. Applying Operating on Transitive Relationships Compatible with Operation to these relat...
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Semigroup|semigroup]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive relation]] on $S$ which is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Let $x, y \in S$ such that $x \mathrel \RR y$. Let $n \in \N_{>0}$ be a [[Definition:Stric...
We proceed by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|mathematical induction]]. By definition of [[Definition:Power of Element of Semigroup|power]]: :$x^1 = x$ :$y^1 = y$ Hence, by assumption: :$x^1 \mathrel \RR y^1$ Suppose now that for $n \ge 1$: :$x^n \mathrel \RR y^n$ Recall the assumption that $x \mathrel \RR...
Transitive Relation Compatible with Semigroup Operation Relates Powers of Related Elements
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Relation_Compatible_with_Semigroup_Operation_Relates_Powers_of_Related_Elements
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Relation_Compatible_with_Semigroup_Operation_Relates_Powers_of_Related_Elements
[ "Compatible Relations", "Semigroups" ]
[ "Definition:Semigroup", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer", "Definition:Power of Element/Semigroup" ]
[ "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Power of Element/Semigroup", "Operating on Transitive Relationships Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Power of Element/Semigroup", "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Category:Compatible Relations", "Category:Semigroups" ]
proofwiki-6685
Reflexive Closure of Transitive Antisymmetric Relation is Ordering
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\prec$ be a transitive, antisymmetric relation on $S$. Let $\preceq$ be the reflexive closure of $\prec$. Then $\preceq$ is an ordering on $S$.
=== Reflexive === Follows from Reflexive Closure is Reflexive. {{qed|lemma}}
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\prec$ be a [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]], [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]] [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $S$. Let $\preceq$ be the [[Definition:Reflexive Closure|reflexive closure]] of $\prec$. Then $\preceq$ is an [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]]...
=== Reflexive === Follows from [[Reflexive Closure is Reflexive]]. {{qed|lemma}}
Reflexive Closure of Transitive Antisymmetric Relation is Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Closure_of_Transitive_Antisymmetric_Relation_is_Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Closure_of_Transitive_Antisymmetric_Relation_is_Ordering
[ "Order Theory", "Reflexive Closures", "Transitive Relations", "Antisymmetric Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Reflexive Closure", "Definition:Ordering" ]
[ "Reflexive Closure is Reflexive" ]
proofwiki-6686
Reflexive Closure of Transitive Relation is Transitive
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR$ be a transitive relation. Let $\RR^=$ be the reflexive closure of $\RR$. Then $\RR^=$ is also transitive.
Let $a, b, c \in S$. Suppose that $a \mathrel {\RR^=} b$ and $b \mathrel {\RR^=} c$. If $a = b$, then since $b \mathrel {\RR^=} c$, also $a \mathrel {\RR^=} c$. If $b = c$, then since $a \mathrel {\RR^=} b$, also $a \mathrel {\RR^=} c$. The only case that remains is that $a \ne b$ and $b \ne c$. Then by the definition ...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive relation]]. Let $\RR^=$ be the [[Definition:Reflexive Closure|reflexive closure]] of $\RR$. Then $\RR^=$ is also [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]].
Let $a, b, c \in S$. Suppose that $a \mathrel {\RR^=} b$ and $b \mathrel {\RR^=} c$. If $a = b$, then since $b \mathrel {\RR^=} c$, also $a \mathrel {\RR^=} c$. If $b = c$, then since $a \mathrel {\RR^=} b$, also $a \mathrel {\RR^=} c$. The only case that remains is that $a \ne b$ and $b \ne c$. Then by the [[Def...
Reflexive Closure of Transitive Relation is Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Closure_of_Transitive_Relation_is_Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Closure_of_Transitive_Relation_is_Transitive
[ "Reflexive Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Closure", "Definition:Transitive Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Reflexive Closure", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation" ]
proofwiki-6687
Reflexive Closure of Antisymmetric Relation is Antisymmetric
Let $S$ be a set. Let $RR$ be an antisymmetric relation on $S$. Let $\RR^=$ be the reflexive closure of $\RR$. Then $\RR^=$ is also antisymmetric.
Let $a, b \in S$. Suppose that $a \mathrel {\RR^=} b$ and $b \mathrel {\RR^=} a$. By definition of $\RR^=$, this means: :$a \mathrel \RR b$ or $a = b$ :$b \mathrel \RR a$ or $b = a$ If $a = b$ or $b = a$ we are done, by definition of an antisymmetric relation. So suppose $a \mathrel \RR b$ and $b \mathrel \RR a$. Becau...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $RR$ be an [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric relation]] on $S$. Let $\RR^=$ be the [[Definition:Reflexive Closure|reflexive closure]] of $\RR$. Then $\RR^=$ is also [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]].
Let $a, b \in S$. Suppose that $a \mathrel {\RR^=} b$ and $b \mathrel {\RR^=} a$. By [[Definition:Reflexive Closure|definition of $\RR^=$]], this means: :$a \mathrel \RR b$ or $a = b$ :$b \mathrel \RR a$ or $b = a$ If $a = b$ or $b = a$ we are done, by definition of an [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmet...
Reflexive Closure of Antisymmetric Relation is Antisymmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Closure_of_Antisymmetric_Relation_is_Antisymmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_Closure_of_Antisymmetric_Relation_is_Antisymmetric
[ "Reflexive Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Closure", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Reflexive Closure", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Category:Reflexive Closures" ]
proofwiki-6688
Positive Infinity is Greatest Element
Let $\left({\overline \R, \le}\right)$ be the extended real numbers with their usual ordering. Then $+\infty$ is the greatest element of $\overline \R$.
We have, by definition of the usual ordering on $\overline \R$: :$\forall x \in \overline \R: x \le +\infty$ That is, $+\infty$ is the greatest element of $\overline \R$. {{qed}}
Let $\left({\overline \R, \le}\right)$ be the [[Definition:Extended Real Number Line|extended real numbers]] with their [[Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers|usual ordering]]. Then $+\infty$ is the [[Definition:Greatest Element|greatest element]] of $\overline \R$.
We have, by definition of the [[Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers|usual ordering]] on $\overline \R$: :$\forall x \in \overline \R: x \le +\infty$ That is, $+\infty$ is the [[Definition:Greatest Element|greatest element]] of $\overline \R$. {{qed}}
Positive Infinity is Greatest Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Infinity_is_Greatest_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Positive_Infinity_is_Greatest_Element
[ "Order Theory", "Extended Real Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Extended Real Number Line", "Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers", "Definition:Greatest Element" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers", "Definition:Greatest Element" ]
proofwiki-6689
Negative Infinity is Smallest Element
Let $\left({\overline \R, \le}\right)$ be the extended real numbers with their usual ordering. Then $-\infty$ is the smallest element of $\overline \R$.
We have, by definition of the usual ordering on $\overline \R$: :$\forall x \in \overline \R: -\infty \le x$ That is, $-\infty$ is the smallest element of $\overline \R$. {{qed}}
Let $\left({\overline \R, \le}\right)$ be the [[Definition:Extended Real Number Line|extended real numbers]] with their [[Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers|usual ordering]]. Then $-\infty$ is the [[Definition:Smallest Element|smallest element]] of $\overline \R$.
We have, by definition of the [[Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers|usual ordering]] on $\overline \R$: :$\forall x \in \overline \R: -\infty \le x$ That is, $-\infty$ is the [[Definition:Smallest Element|smallest element]] of $\overline \R$. {{qed}}
Negative Infinity is Smallest Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Negative_Infinity_is_Smallest_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Negative_Infinity_is_Smallest_Element
[ "Order Theory", "Extended Real Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Extended Real Number Line", "Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers", "Definition:Smallest Element" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering on Extended Real Numbers", "Definition:Smallest Element" ]
proofwiki-6690
Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible/Corollary
:$\forall x, y \in G:$ ::$(1): \quad x \mathrel \RR y \iff e \mathrel \RR y \circ x^{-1}$ ::$(2): \quad x \mathrel \RR y \iff e \mathrel \RR x^{-1} \circ y$ ::$(3): \quad x \mathrel \RR y \iff x \circ y^{-1} \mathrel \RR e$ ::$(4): \quad x \mathrel \RR y \iff y^{-1} \circ x \mathrel \RR e$
Applying Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible to $x$, $y$, and $x^{-1}$ we obtain: :$x \mathrel \RR y \iff x \circ x^{-1} \mathrel \RR y \circ x^{-1}$ :$x \mathrel \RR y \iff x^{-1} \circ x \mathrel \RR x^{-1} \circ y$ Applying Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible t...
:$\forall x, y \in G:$ ::$(1): \quad x \mathrel \RR y \iff e \mathrel \RR y \circ x^{-1}$ ::$(2): \quad x \mathrel \RR y \iff e \mathrel \RR x^{-1} \circ y$ ::$(3): \quad x \mathrel \RR y \iff x \circ y^{-1} \mathrel \RR e$ ::$(4): \quad x \mathrel \RR y \iff y^{-1} \circ x \mathrel \RR e$
Applying [[Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible]] to $x$, $y$, and $x^{-1}$ we obtain: :$x \mathrel \RR y \iff x \circ x^{-1} \mathrel \RR y \circ x^{-1}$ :$x \mathrel \RR y \iff x^{-1} \circ x \mathrel \RR x^{-1} \circ y$ Applying [[Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Comp...
Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible/Corollary
[ "Relations Compatible with Group Operation" ]
[]
[ "Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible", "Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible", "Definition:Inverse (Abstract Algebra)/Inverse", "Category:Relations Compatible with Group Operation" ]
proofwiki-6691
Dual Pairs (Order Theory)
Let $\left({S, \preceq}\right)$ be an ordered set. Let $a, b \in S$, and let $T \subseteq S$. Then the following phrases about, and concepts pertaining to $\left({S, \preceq}\right)$ are dual to one another: :{| style="text-align:center" | $b \preceq a$ | width = "20px" | | $a \preceq b$ |- | $a$ succeeds $b$ | | $a$ p...
Let $\succeq$ be the dual ordering of $\preceq$. By definition of dual statement: :$b \preceq a$ is dual to: :$b \succeq a$ and by definition of dual ordering, this is equivalent to: :$a \preceq b$ By virtue of Dual of Dual Statement (Order Theory), the converse follows. The other claims are proved on the following pag...
Let $\left({S, \preceq}\right)$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $a, b \in S$, and let $T \subseteq S$. Then the following phrases about, and concepts pertaining to $\left({S, \preceq}\right)$ are [[Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)|dual]] to one another: :{| style="text-align:center" | $b \...
Let $\succeq$ be the [[Definition:Dual Ordering|dual ordering]] of $\preceq$. By definition of [[Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)|dual statement]]: :$b \preceq a$ is dual to: :$b \succeq a$ and by definition of [[Definition:Dual Ordering|dual ordering]], this is [[Definition:Logical Equivalence|equivalent]...
Dual Pairs (Order Theory)
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Dual_Pairs_(Order_Theory)
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Dual_Pairs_(Order_Theory)
[ "Order Theory", "Dual Pairs (Order Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)", "Definition:Succeed", "Definition:Precede", "Definition:Strictly Succeed", "Definition:Strictly Precede", "Definition:Upper Bound of Set", "Definition:Lower Bound of Set", "Definition:Supremum of Set", "Definition:Infimum of Set...
[ "Definition:Dual Ordering", "Definition:Dual Statement (Order Theory)", "Definition:Dual Ordering", "Definition:Logical Equivalence", "Dual of Dual Statement (Order Theory)", "Succeed is Dual to Precede", "Strictly Succeed is Dual to Strictly Precede", "Upper Bound is Dual to Lower Bound", "Supremum...
proofwiki-6692
Conditional is not Right Self-Distributive/Formulation 1
While this holds: :$\paren {p \implies q} \implies r \vdash \paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r}$ its converse does not: :$\paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r} \not \vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies r$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables to the proposition: :$\paren {p \implies q} \implies r \vdash \paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r}$ As can be seen for all boolean interpretations by inspection, where the truth value under the main connective on the {{LHS}} is $\T$, that under the one on the {{RHS}} ...
While this holds: :$\paren {p \implies q} \implies r \vdash \paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r}$ its converse does not: :$\paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r} \not \vdash \paren {p \implies q} \implies r$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]] to the proposition: :$\paren {p \implies q} \implies r \vdash \paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r}$ As can be seen for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]] by inspection, where the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]] under the [[D...
Conditional is not Right Self-Distributive/Formulation 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conditional_is_not_Right_Self-Distributive/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conditional_is_not_Right_Self-Distributive/Formulation_1
[ "Truth Table Proofs", "Conditional is not Right Self-Distributive" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Language of Propositional Logic/Formal Grammar/WFF", "Definition:Logical Equivalence", "Category:Truth Table Proofs", "Category:Conditional is not Righ...
proofwiki-6693
Conditional is not Right Self-Distributive/Formulation 2
While this holds: :$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r} }$ its converse does not: :$\not \vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies r}$
{{ProofWanted|Can be seen to be logically equivalent to Conditional is not Right Self-Distributive/Formulation 1 by application of the Rule of Implication and Modus Ponendo Ponens.}}
While this holds: :$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies r} \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r} }$ its converse does not: :$\not \vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies r} \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies r}$
{{ProofWanted|Can be seen to be [[Definition:Logical Equivalence|logically equivalent]] to [[Conditional is not Right Self-Distributive/Formulation 1]] by application of the [[Rule of Implication]] and [[Modus Ponendo Ponens]].}}
Conditional is not Right Self-Distributive/Formulation 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conditional_is_not_Right_Self-Distributive/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conditional_is_not_Right_Self-Distributive/Formulation_2
[ "Conditional is not Right Self-Distributive" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Logical Equivalence", "Conditional is not Right Self-Distributive/Formulation 1", "Rule of Implication", "Modus Ponendo Ponens" ]
proofwiki-6694
Cauchy-Riemann Equations
Let $D \subseteq \C$ be an open subset of the set of complex numbers $\C$. Let $f: D \to \C$ be a complex function on $D$. Let $u, v: \set {\tuple {x, y} \in \R^2: x + i y = z \in D} \to \R$ be the two real-valued functions defined as: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map u {x, y} | r = \map \Re {\map f z} }} {{eqn | l...
=== Necessary Condition === {{:Cauchy-Riemann Equations/Necessary Condition}}{{qed|lemma}}
Let $D \subseteq \C$ be an [[Definition:Open Set (Complex Analysis)|open]] [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Complex Number|complex numbers]] $\C$. Let $f: D \to \C$ be a [[Definition:Complex Function|complex function]] on $D$. Let $u, v: \set {\tuple {x, y} \in \R^2: x + i y...
=== [[Cauchy-Riemann Equations/Necessary Condition|Necessary Condition]] === {{:Cauchy-Riemann Equations/Necessary Condition}}{{qed|lemma}}
Cauchy-Riemann Equations
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cauchy-Riemann_Equations
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cauchy-Riemann_Equations
[ "Cauchy-Riemann Equations", "Complex Analysis" ]
[ "Definition:Open Set/Complex Analysis", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Complex Function", "Definition:Real-Valued Function", "Definition:Complex Number/Real Part", "Definition:Complex Number/Imaginary Part", "Definition:Differentiable Mapping/Complex ...
[ "Cauchy-Riemann Equations/Necessary Condition" ]
proofwiki-6695
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{TheoremIntro|1|\paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }|Self-Distributive Law for Conditional: Formulation 2...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{TheoremIntro|1|\paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }|[[Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation ...
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2
[ "Self-Distributive Law for Conditional" ]
[]
[ "Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2/Forward Implication", "Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication" ]
proofwiki-6696
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{Assumption |1|p \implies \paren {q \implies r} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r}|1|Self-Distributive Law for Conditional: Formulation 1}} {{Imp...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{Assumption |1|p \implies \paren {q \implies r} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r}|1|[[Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 1/Forwar...
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication/Proof_1
[ "Self-Distributive Law for Conditional" ]
[]
[ "Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 1/Forward Implication" ]
proofwiki-6697
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{Assumption |1|p \implies \paren {q \implies r} }} {{Assumption |2|p \implies q}} {{Assumption |3|p}} {{ModusPonens |4|1,3|q \implies r|1|3}} {{ModusPonens |5|2,3|q|2|3}} {{ModusPonen...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \implies \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } }} {{Assumption |1|p \implies \paren {q \implies r} }} {{Assumption |2|p \implies q}} {{Assumption |3|p}} {{ModusPonens |4|1,3|q \implies r|1|3}} {{ModusPonens |5|2,3|q|2|3}} {{ModusPonen...
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication/Proof_2
[ "Self-Distributive Law for Conditional" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-6698
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth value under the main connective is true for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|ccccc|c|ccccccc|} \hline (p & \implies & (q & \implies & r)) & \implies & ((p & \implies & q) & \implies & (p & \implies & r)) \\ \hline \F & \T ...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]]. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connective]] is [[Definition:True|true]] for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|c...
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Self-Distributive Law for Conditional" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-6699
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau |\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } \implies \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } }} {{Assumption |1|\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }} {{SequentIntro |2|1|p \implies \paren {q \implies r}|1|Self-Distributive Law for Conditional: Formulation...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }$
{{BeginTableau |\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} } \implies \paren {p \implies \paren {q \implies r} } }} {{Assumption |1|\paren {p \implies q} \implies \paren {p \implies r} }} {{SequentIntro |2|1|p \implies \paren {q \implies r}|1|[[Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulatio...
Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Self-Distributive_Law_for_Conditional/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication/Proof_1
[ "Self-Distributive Law for Conditional" ]
[]
[ "Self-Distributive Law for Conditional/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication" ]