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-7300
Factor Principles/Disjunction on Right/Formulation 1
:$p \implies q \vdash \paren {p \lor r} \implies \paren {q \lor r}$
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}} is also $T$: :$\begin{array}{|ccc||ccc||ccccccc|} \hline p & q & r & (p & \implies & q) & (p & \lor & r) & \implies & (q & \lor & r) \\ \hline F & F & F ...
:$p \implies q \vdash \paren {p \lor r} \implies \paren {q \lor r}$
As can be seen for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]] by inspection, where the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connective]] on the {{LHS}} is $T$, that under the one on the {{RHS}} is also $T$: :$\begin{array}{|ccc...
Factor Principles/Disjunction on Right/Formulation 1/Proof 4
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Factor_Principles/Disjunction_on_Right/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Factor_Principles/Disjunction_on_Right/Formulation_1/Proof_4
[ "Factor Principles" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic" ]
proofwiki-7301
Factor Principles/Disjunction on Left/Formulation 1
: $p \implies q \vdash \paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q}$
{{BeginTableau|p \implies q \vdash \paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q} }} {{Premise|1|p \implies q}} {{TheoremIntro|2|r \implies r|Law of Identity: Formulation 2}} {{SequentIntro|3|1|\paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q}|2, 1|Constructive Dilemma}} {{EndTableau}} {{qed}}
: $p \implies q \vdash \paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q}$
{{BeginTableau|p \implies q \vdash \paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q} }} {{Premise|1|p \implies q}} {{TheoremIntro|2|r \implies r|[[Law of Identity/Formulation 2|Law of Identity: Formulation 2]]}} {{SequentIntro|3|1|\paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q}|2, 1|[[Constructive Dilemma/Formulation 1|Constru...
Factor Principles/Disjunction on Left/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Factor_Principles/Disjunction_on_Left/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Factor_Principles/Disjunction_on_Left/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Factor Principles" ]
[]
[ "Law of Identity/Formulation 2", "Constructive Dilemma/Formulation 1" ]
proofwiki-7302
Factor Principles/Disjunction on Left/Formulation 1
: $p \implies q \vdash \paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q}$
{{BeginTableau|p \implies q \vdash \paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q} }} {{Premise|1|p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|r \lor p}} {{Assumption|3|r}} {{Addition|4|3|r \lor q|3|1}} {{Assumption|5|p}} {{ModusPonens|6|1, 5|q|1|5}} {{Addition|7|1, 5|r \lor q|6|2}} {{ProofByCases|8|1, 2|r \lor q|2|3|4|5|6}} {{Implicati...
: $p \implies q \vdash \paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q}$
{{BeginTableau|p \implies q \vdash \paren {r \lor p} \implies \paren {r \lor q} }} {{Premise|1|p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|r \lor p}} {{Assumption|3|r}} {{Addition|4|3|r \lor q|3|1}} {{Assumption|5|p}} {{ModusPonens|6|1, 5|q|1|5}} {{Addition|7|1, 5|r \lor q|6|2}} {{ProofByCases|8|1, 2|r \lor q|2|3|4|5|6}} {{Implicati...
Factor Principles/Disjunction on Left/Formulation 1/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Factor_Principles/Disjunction_on_Left/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Factor_Principles/Disjunction_on_Left/Formulation_1/Proof_2
[ "Factor Principles" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7303
Disjunction of Conditionals
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \lor \paren {q \implies r}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \lor \paren {q \implies r} }} {{ExcludedMiddle|1|q \lor \neg q}} {{Assumption|2|q}} {{SequentIntro|3|2|p \implies q|2|True Statement is implied by Every Statement}} {{Addition|4|2|\paren {p \implies q} \lor \paren {q \implies r}|3|1}} {{Assumption|5|\neg q}} {{SequentIntro|6|...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \lor \paren {q \implies r}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \implies q} \lor \paren {q \implies r} }} {{ExcludedMiddle|1|q \lor \neg q}} {{Assumption|2|q}} {{SequentIntro|3|2|p \implies q|2|[[True Statement is implied by Every Statement]]}} {{Addition|4|2|\paren {p \implies q} \lor \paren {q \implies r}|3|1}} {{Assumption|5|\neg q}} {{SequentIntr...
Disjunction of Conditionals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_of_Conditionals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_of_Conditionals
[ "Disjunction", "Conditional" ]
[]
[ "True Statement is implied by Every Statement", "False Statement implies Every Statement" ]
proofwiki-7304
Principle of Composition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication
:$\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} \vdash \paren {p \land q} \implies r$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} \vdash \paren {p \land q} \implies r}} {{Premise | 1 | \paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} }} {{Assumption | 2 | p \implies r}} {{Assumption | 3 | p \land q}} {{Simplification | 4 | 3 | p | 3 | 1}} {{ModusPonens | 5 | 2,...
:$\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} \vdash \paren {p \land q} \implies r$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} \vdash \paren {p \land q} \implies r}} {{Premise | 1 | \paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} }} {{Assumption | 2 | p \implies r}} {{Assumption | 3 | p \land q}} {{Simplification | 4 | 3 | p | 3 | 1}} {{ModusPonens | 5 | 2,...
Principle of Composition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Principle_of_Composition/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Principle_of_Composition/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication
[ "Principle of Composition" ]
[]
[ "Category:Principle of Composition" ]
proofwiki-7305
Principle of Composition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication
:$\paren {p \land q} \implies r \vdash \paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r}$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \land q} \implies r \vdash \paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} }} {{Premise | 1 | \paren {p \land q} \implies r}} {{SequentIntro | 2 | 1 | \neg \paren {p \lor q} \lor r | 1 | Rule of Material Implication}} {{SequentIntro | 3 | 1 | \neg p \lor \neg q \lor r | 2 | De Mo...
:$\paren {p \land q} \implies r \vdash \paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r}$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {p \land q} \implies r \vdash \paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} }} {{Premise | 1 | \paren {p \land q} \implies r}} {{SequentIntro | 2 | 1 | \neg \paren {p \lor q} \lor r | 1 | [[Rule of Material Implication/Formulation 1|Rule of Material Implication]]}} {{SequentIntro |...
Principle of Composition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Principle_of_Composition/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Principle_of_Composition/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication
[ "Principle of Composition" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Material Implication/Formulation 1", "De Morgan's Laws (Logic)/Disjunction of Negations", "Rule of Material Implication/Formulation 1", "Rule of Material Implication/Formulation 1", "Category:Principle of Composition" ]
proofwiki-7306
Principle of Composition/Formulation 2
:$\paren {\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \land q} \implies r}$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \land q} \implies r} }} {{Assumption |1|\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {p \land q} \implies r|1|Principle of Composition: Formulation 1}} {{Implication |3||\paren {\paren {p \...
:$\paren {\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \land q} \implies r}$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} } \iff \paren {\paren {p \land q} \implies r} }} {{Assumption |1|\paren {p \implies r} \lor \paren {q \implies r} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {p \land q} \implies r|1|[[Principle of Composition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication|Principle of Compo...
Principle of Composition/Formulation 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Principle_of_Composition/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Principle_of_Composition/Formulation_2
[ "Principle of Composition" ]
[]
[ "Principle of Composition/Formulation 1/Forward Implication", "Principle of Composition/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication" ]
proofwiki-7307
Inversion Mapping on Topological Group is Homeomorphism
Let $T = \struct {G, \circ, \tau}$ be a topological group. Let $\phi: G \to G$ be the inversion mapping of $T$. Then $\phi$ is a homeomorphism.
From the definition of topological group, $\phi$ is continuous. By Inversion Mapping is Involution, $\phi$ is an involution. By Continuous Involution is Homeomorphism, $\phi$ is a homeomorphism. {{qed}} Category:Inversion Mappings Category:Homeomorphisms (Topological Spaces) Category:Topological Groups dd53003fsqyn6lrl...
Let $T = \struct {G, \circ, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Topological Group|topological group]]. Let $\phi: G \to G$ be the [[Definition:Inversion Mapping|inversion mapping]] of $T$. Then $\phi$ is a [[Definition:Homeomorphism (Topological Spaces)|homeomorphism]].
From the definition of [[Definition:Topological Group|topological group]], $\phi$ is [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|continuous]]. By [[Inversion Mapping is Involution]], $\phi$ is an [[Definition:Involution (Mapping)|involution]]. By [[Continuous Involution is Homeomorphism]], $\phi$ is a [[Definition:Hom...
Inversion Mapping on Topological Group is Homeomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_on_Topological_Group_is_Homeomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_on_Topological_Group_is_Homeomorphism
[ "Inversion Mappings", "Homeomorphisms (Topological Spaces)", "Topological Groups" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Group", "Definition:Inversion Mapping", "Definition:Homeomorphism/Topological Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Group", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Inversion Mapping is Involution", "Definition:Involution (Mapping)", "Continuous Involution is Homeomorphism", "Definition:Homeomorphism/Topological Spaces", "Category:Inversion Mappings", "Category:Homeomorphisms (Topologica...
proofwiki-7308
De Morgan's Laws (Logic)/Conjunction of Negations/Formulation 2/Forward Implication
:$\paren {\neg p \land \neg q} \implies \paren {\neg \paren {p \lor q} }$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {\neg p \land \neg q} \implies \paren {\neg \paren {p \lor q} } }} {{Assumption|1|\neg p \land \neg q}} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\neg \paren {p \lor q}|1|De Morgan's Laws (Logic): Conjunction of Negations: Formulation 1}} {{Implication|3||\paren {\neg p \land \neg q} \implies \paren {\neg \paren {p \lor...
:$\paren {\neg p \land \neg q} \implies \paren {\neg \paren {p \lor q} }$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {\neg p \land \neg q} \implies \paren {\neg \paren {p \lor q} } }} {{Assumption|1|\neg p \land \neg q}} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\neg \paren {p \lor q}|1|[[De Morgan's Laws (Logic)/Conjunction of Negations/Formulation 1/Forward Implication|De Morgan's Laws (Logic): Conjunction of Negations: Formulation ...
De Morgan's Laws (Logic)/Conjunction of Negations/Formulation 2/Forward Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/De_Morgan's_Laws_(Logic)/Conjunction_of_Negations/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/De_Morgan's_Laws_(Logic)/Conjunction_of_Negations/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication
[ "De Morgan's Laws (Logic)" ]
[]
[ "De Morgan's Laws (Logic)/Conjunction of Negations/Formulation 1/Forward Implication" ]
proofwiki-7309
De Morgan's Laws (Logic)/Conjunction of Negations/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication
:$\paren {\neg \paren {p \lor q} } \implies \paren {\neg p \land \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg \paren {p \lor q} } \implies \paren {\neg p \land \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg \paren {p \lor q} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\neg p \land \neg q|1|De Morgan's Laws (Logic): Conjunction of Negations: Formulation 1}} {{Implication|3||\paren {\neg \paren {p \lor q} } \implies \paren {\neg p ...
:$\paren {\neg \paren {p \lor q} } \implies \paren {\neg p \land \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg \paren {p \lor q} } \implies \paren {\neg p \land \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg \paren {p \lor q} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\neg p \land \neg q|1|[[De Morgan's Laws (Logic)/Conjunction of Negations/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication|De Morgan's Laws (Logic): Conjunction of Negations: Form...
De Morgan's Laws (Logic)/Conjunction of Negations/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/De_Morgan's_Laws_(Logic)/Conjunction_of_Negations/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/De_Morgan's_Laws_(Logic)/Conjunction_of_Negations/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication
[ "De Morgan's Laws (Logic)" ]
[]
[ "De Morgan's Laws (Logic)/Conjunction of Negations/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication", "Category:De Morgan's Laws (Logic)" ]
proofwiki-7310
Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a totally ordered set. Let $\tau$ be a topology for $S$. {{TFAE|def = Generalized Ordered Space}}
=== Definition $(1)$ implies Definition $(3)$ === {{:Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1 implies Definition 3}}{{qed|lemma}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Totally Ordered Set|totally ordered set]]. Let $\tau$ be a [[Definition:Topology|topology]] for $S$. {{TFAE|def = Generalized Ordered Space}}
=== [[Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1 implies Definition 3|Definition $(1)$ implies Definition $(3)$]] === {{:Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1 implies Definition 3}}{{qed|lemma}}
Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Generalized_Ordered_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Generalized_Ordered_Space
[ "Generalized Ordered Spaces", "Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space" ]
[ "Definition:Totally Ordered Set", "Definition:Topology" ]
[ "Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1 implies Definition 3" ]
proofwiki-7311
Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 2 implies Definition 1
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be a generalized ordered space by Definition 2: {{:Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 2}} Then $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ is a generalized ordered space by Definition 1: {{:Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1}}
Let $x \in U \in \tau$. Then by the definition of topological embedding: :$\map \phi U$ is an open neighborhood of $\map \phi x$ in $\map \phi S$ with the subspace topology. Thus by Basis for Topological Subspace and the definition of the order topology, there is an open interval or open ray $I' \in \tau'$ such that: :...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 2|generalized ordered space by Definition 2]]: {{:Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 2}} Then $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ is a [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1|generalized ordered space by Definitio...
Let $x \in U \in \tau$. Then by the definition of [[Definition:Topological Embedding|topological embedding]]: :$\map \phi U$ is an [[Definition:Open Neighborhood of Point|open neighborhood]] of $\map \phi x$ in $\map \phi S$ with the [[Definition:Subspace Topology|subspace topology]]. Thus by [[Basis for Topological ...
Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 2 implies Definition 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Generalized_Ordered_Space/Definition_2_implies_Definition_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Generalized_Ordered_Space/Definition_2_implies_Definition_1
[ "Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space" ]
[ "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 2", "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1" ]
[ "Definition:Embedding (Topology)", "Definition:Open Neighborhood/Point", "Definition:Topological Subspace", "Basis for Topological Subspace", "Definition:Order Topology", "Definition:Interval/Ordered Set/Open", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)/Open", "Definition:Interval/Ordered Set", "Definition:Ray ...
proofwiki-7312
Inverse Image of Order-Convex Set under Monotone Mapping is Order-Convex
Let $\struct {X, \le}$ and $\struct {Y, \preceq}$ be ordered sets. Let $f: X \to Y$ be a monotone mapping. Let $C$ be a order-convex subset of $Y$. Then $f^{-1} \sqbrk C$ is order-convex in $X$.
Suppose $f$ is increasing. Let $a, b, c \in X$ such that $a \le b \le c$. Let $a, c \in f^{-1} \sqbrk C$. By definition of inverse image: :$\map f a, \map f c \in C$ By definition of increasing mapping: :$\map f a \preceq \map f b \preceq \map f c$ Thus by definition of order-convex set: :$\map f b \in C$ Then by defin...
Let $\struct {X, \le}$ and $\struct {Y, \preceq}$ be [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered sets]]. Let $f: X \to Y$ be a [[Definition:Monotone Mapping|monotone mapping]]. Let $C$ be a [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]] [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $Y$. Then $f^{-1} \sqbrk C$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set...
Suppose $f$ is [[Definition:Increasing Mapping|increasing]]. Let $a, b, c \in X$ such that $a \le b \le c$. Let $a, c \in f^{-1} \sqbrk C$. By definition of [[Definition:Inverse Image|inverse image]]: :$\map f a, \map f c \in C$ By definition of [[Definition:Increasing Mapping|increasing mapping]]: :$\map f a \pre...
Inverse Image of Order-Convex Set under Monotone Mapping is Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inverse_Image_of_Order-Convex_Set_under_Monotone_Mapping_is_Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inverse_Image_of_Order-Convex_Set_under_Monotone_Mapping_is_Order-Convex
[ "Order Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Monotone (Order Theory)/Mapping", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
[ "Definition:Increasing/Mapping", "Definition:Inverse Image", "Definition:Increasing/Mapping", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Inverse Image", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Decreasing/Mapping", "Category:Order Theory" ]
proofwiki-7313
Conjunction with Law of Excluded Middle
:$\vdash p \iff \paren {p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \iff \paren {p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|p}} {{ExcludedMiddle|2|q \lor \neg q}} {{Assumption|3|q}} {{Conjunction|4|1, 3|p \land q|1|2}} {{Addition|5|1, 3|\paren {p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q}|4|1}} {{Assumption|6|\neg q}} {{Conjunction|7|1, 6|p \land \neg ...
:$\vdash p \iff \paren {p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \iff \paren {p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|p}} {{ExcludedMiddle|2|q \lor \neg q}} {{Assumption|3|q}} {{Conjunction|4|1, 3|p \land q|1|2}} {{Addition|5|1, 3|\paren {p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q}|4|1}} {{Assumption|6|\neg q}} {{Conjunction|7|1, 6|p \land \neg ...
Conjunction with Law of Excluded Middle
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Law_of_Excluded_Middle
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_with_Law_of_Excluded_Middle
[ "Conjunction", "Law of Excluded Middle" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Distribution/Conjunction Distributes over Disjunction" ]
proofwiki-7314
Proof by Cases with Contradiction
:$\vdash p \iff \paren {p \lor q} \land \paren {p \lor \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \iff \paren {p \lor q} \land \paren {p \lor \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|p}} {{Addition|2|1|p \lor q|1|1}} {{Addition|3|1|p \lor \neg q|1|2}} {{Conjunction|4|1|\paren {p \lor q} \land \paren {p \lor \neg q} |2|3}} {{Implication|5||p \implies \paren {p \lor q} \land \paren {p \lor \neg q}|1|4}} {{As...
:$\vdash p \iff \paren {p \lor q} \land \paren {p \lor \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash p \iff \paren {p \lor q} \land \paren {p \lor \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|p}} {{Addition|2|1|p \lor q|1|1}} {{Addition|3|1|p \lor \neg q|1|2}} {{Conjunction|4|1|\paren {p \lor q} \land \paren {p \lor \neg q} |2|3}} {{Implication|5||p \implies \paren {p \lor q} \land \paren {p \lor \neg q}|1|4}} {{As...
Proof by Cases with Contradiction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Proof_by_Cases_with_Contradiction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Proof_by_Cases_with_Contradiction
[ "Principle of Non-Contradiction", "Proof by Cases" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Distribution/Disjunction Distributes over Conjunction", "Principle of Non-Contradiction/Sequent Form/Formulation 2" ]
proofwiki-7315
Ray is Order-Convex
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $I$ be a ray, either open or closed. Then $I$ is order-convex in $S$.
The cases for upward-pointing and downward-pointing rays are equivalent. {{explain|"Dual of convex is convex" and duality, upon which the above statement depends.}} {{WLOG}}, suppose that $U$ is an upward-pointing ray. By the definition of a ray, there exists an $a \in S$ such that: :$I = a^\succ$ or; :$I = a^\succeq$ ...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $I$ be a [[Definition:Ray (Order Theory)|ray]], either [[Definition:Open Ray|open]] or [[Definition:Closed Ray|closed]]. Then $I$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]] in $S$.
The cases for [[Definition:Upward-Pointing Ray|upward-pointing]] and [[Definition:Downward-Pointing Ray|downward-pointing]] [[Definition:Ray (Order Theory)|rays]] are equivalent. {{explain|"Dual of convex is convex" and duality, upon which the above statement depends.}} {{WLOG}}, suppose that $U$ is an [[Definition:U...
Ray is Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ray_is_Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ray_is_Order-Convex
[ "Order-Convex Sets", "Rays (Order Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)/Open", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)/Closed", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
[ "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)/Upward-Pointing", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)/Downward-Pointing", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)/Upward-Pointing", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)/Open", "Definition:Ray (Order Theory)/Closed", "Definiti...
proofwiki-7316
Intersection of Order-Convex Sets is Order-Convex
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $\CC$ be a set of order-convex sets in $S$. Then $\bigcap \CC$ is order-convex.
Let $a, b, c \in S$. Let $a, c \in \bigcap \CC$. Let $a \prec b \prec c$. By the definition of intersection: :$\forall T \in \CC: a, c \in T$ Since each $T \in \CC$ is order-convex: :$\forall T \in \CC: b \in T$ Thus by the definition of intersection: :$b \in \bigcap \CC$ Thus $\bigcap \CC$ is order-convex. {{qed}} Cat...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $\CC$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex sets]] in $S$. Then $\bigcap \CC$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]].
Let $a, b, c \in S$. Let $a, c \in \bigcap \CC$. Let $a \prec b \prec c$. By the definition of [[Definition:Set Intersection|intersection]]: :$\forall T \in \CC: a, c \in T$ Since each $T \in \CC$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]]: :$\forall T \in \CC: b \in T$ Thus by the definition of [[Definiti...
Intersection of Order-Convex Sets is Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_of_Order-Convex_Sets_is_Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_of_Order-Convex_Sets_is_Order-Convex
[ "Order-Convex Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
[ "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Category:Order-Convex Sets" ]
proofwiki-7317
Upper and Lower Closures are Order-Convex
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $a \in S$. Then $a^\succeq$, $a^\succ$, $a^\preceq$, and $a^\prec$ are order-convex in $S$.
The cases for upper and lower closures are dual, so we need only prove the case for upper closures. Suppose, then, that $C = a^\succeq$ or $C = a^\succ$. Suppose that $x, y, z \in S$, $x \prec y \prec z$, and $x, z \in C$. Then $a \preceq x \prec y$, so $a \prec y$ by Extended Transitivity. Therefore $y \in a^\succ \su...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $a \in S$. Then $a^\succeq$, $a^\succ$, $a^\preceq$, and $a^\prec$ are [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]] in $S$.
The cases for upper and lower closures are dual, so we need only prove the case for upper closures. Suppose, then, that $C = a^\succeq$ or $C = a^\succ$. Suppose that $x, y, z \in S$, $x \prec y \prec z$, and $x, z \in C$. Then $a \preceq x \prec y$, so $a \prec y$ by [[Extended Transitivity]]. Therefore $y \in a^\...
Upper and Lower Closures are Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_and_Lower_Closures_are_Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_and_Lower_Closures_are_Order-Convex
[ "Lower Closures", "Upper Closures", "Order-Convex Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
[ "Extended Transitivity", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Category:Lower Closures", "Category:Upper Closures", "Category:Order-Convex Sets" ]
proofwiki-7318
Transitive Closure of Symmetric Relation is Symmetric
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR$ be a symmetric relation on $S$. Let $\TT$ be the transitive closure of $\RR$. The $\TT$ is symmetric.
Let $a, b \in S$ with $a \mathrel \TT b$. By the definition of transitive closure, there is an $n \in \N$ such that $a \mathrel {\RR^n} b $. Thus there are $x_0, x_1, \dots x_n \in S$ such that: :$x_0 = a$ :$x_n = b$ :For $k = 0, \dots, n-1$: $x_k \mathrel \RR x_{k + 1}$ For $k = 0, \dots, n$, let $y_k = x_{n - k}$. Th...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:set|set]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Symmetric Relation|symmetric relation]] on $S$. Let $\TT$ be the [[Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation|transitive closure]] of $\RR$. The $\TT$ is [[Definition:Symmetric Relation|symmetric]].
Let $a, b \in S$ with $a \mathrel \TT b$. By the definition of [[Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation/Union of Compositions|transitive closure]], there is an $n \in \N$ such that $a \mathrel {\RR^n} b $. Thus there are $x_0, x_1, \dots x_n \in S$ such that: :$x_0 = a$ :$x_n = b$ :For $k = 0, \dots, n-1$: $x_k \m...
Transitive Closure of Symmetric Relation is Symmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Closure_of_Symmetric_Relation_is_Symmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Closure_of_Symmetric_Relation_is_Symmetric
[ "Symmetric Relations", "Transitive Closures" ]
[ "Definition:set", "Definition:Symmetric Relation", "Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation", "Definition:Symmetric Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation/Union of Compositions", "Definition:Symmetric Relation", "Category:Symmetric Relations", "Category:Transitive Closures" ]
proofwiki-7319
Transitive Closure of Reflexive Relation is Reflexive
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR$ be a reflexive relation on $S$. Let $\RR^+$ be the transitive closure of $\RR$. Then $\RR^+$ is reflexive.
Let $a \in S$. Since $\RR$ is reflexive: :$\tuple {a, a} \in \RR$ By the definition of transitive closure: :$\RR \subseteq \RR^+$ Thus by the definition of subset: :$\tuple {a, a} \in \RR^+$ Since this holds for all $a \in S$, it follows that $\RR^+$ is reflexive. {{qed}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:set|set]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive relation]] on $S$. Let $\RR^+$ be the [[Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation|transitive closure]] of $\RR$. Then $\RR^+$ is [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]].
Let $a \in S$. Since $\RR$ is [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]]: :$\tuple {a, a} \in \RR$ By the definition of [[Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation/Smallest Transitive Superset|transitive closure]]: :$\RR \subseteq \RR^+$ Thus by the definition of [[Definition:Subset|subset]]: :$\tuple {a, a} \in \R...
Transitive Closure of Reflexive Relation is Reflexive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Closure_of_Reflexive_Relation_is_Reflexive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Closure_of_Reflexive_Relation_is_Reflexive
[ "Reflexive Relations", "Transitive Closures" ]
[ "Definition:set", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation/Smallest Transitive Superset", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Reflexive Relation" ]
proofwiki-7320
Transitive Closure of Reflexive Symmetric Relation is Equivalence
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR$ be a symmetric and reflexive relation on $S$. Then the transitive closure of $\RR$ is an equivalence relation.
Let $\sim$ be the transitive closure of $\RR$. Checking in turn each of the criteria for equivalence:
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Symmetric Relation|symmetric]] and [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]] [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $S$. Then the [[Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation|transitive closure]] of $\RR$ is an [[Definition:Equivalence Relation|equiv...
Let $\sim$ be the [[Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation|transitive closure]] of $\RR$. Checking in turn each of the criteria for [[Definition:Equivalence Relation|equivalence]]:
Transitive Closure of Reflexive Symmetric Relation is Equivalence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Closure_of_Reflexive_Symmetric_Relation_is_Equivalence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Closure_of_Reflexive_Symmetric_Relation_is_Equivalence
[ "Transitive Closures", "Equivalence Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Symmetric Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation", "Definition:Equivalence Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Transitive Closure of Relation", "Definition:Equivalence Relation", "Definition:Equivalence Relation" ]
proofwiki-7321
Union of Overlapping Order-Convex Sets in Toset is Order-Convex
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a totally ordered set. Let $U$ and $V$ be order-convex sets in $S$. Let $U \cap V \ne \O$. Then $U \cup V$ is also order-convex.
Let $a,b,c \in S$ Let $a,c \in U \cup V$. Let $a \prec b \prec c$. If $a, c \in U$ then $b \in U$ because $U$ is order-convex. Thus $b \in U \cup V$ by the definition of union. Similarly, if $a,c \in V$ then $b \in U \cup V$. Otherwise, {{WLOG}}, suppose that $a \in U$ and $c \in V$. Since $U \cap V$ is nonempty by the...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Totally Ordered Set|totally ordered set]]. Let $U$ and $V$ be [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex sets]] in $S$. Let $U \cap V \ne \O$. Then $U \cup V$ is also [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]].
Let $a,b,c \in S$ Let $a,c \in U \cup V$. Let $a \prec b \prec c$. If $a, c \in U$ then $b \in U$ because $U$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]]. Thus $b \in U \cup V$ by the definition of [[Definition:Set Union|union]]. Similarly, if $a,c \in V$ then $b \in U \cup V$. Otherwise, {{WLOG}}, suppose th...
Union of Overlapping Order-Convex Sets in Toset is Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Overlapping_Order-Convex_Sets_in_Toset_is_Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Overlapping_Order-Convex_Sets_in_Toset_is_Order-Convex
[ "Order-Convex Sets", "Total Orderings" ]
[ "Definition:Totally Ordered Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
[ "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Total Ordering", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Category:Order-Convex Sets", "Category:Total Orderings" ]
proofwiki-7322
Rule of Material Equivalence
The '''Rule of Material Equivalence''' is a valid deduction sequent in propositional logic: :If we can conclude that $p$ implies $q$ and if we can also conclude that $q$ implies $p$, then we may infer that $p$ {{iff}} $q$. ==== Formulation 1 ==== {{:Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1}} ==== Formulation 2 ==== {...
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q \vdash \paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{BiconditionalElimination|2|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{BiconditionalElimination|3|1|q \implies p|1|2}} {{Conjunction|4|1|\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p}|2|3}} {{EndTableau}} {{BeginTableau|\paren {p...
The '''[[Rule of Material Equivalence]]''' is a [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid]] deduction [[Definition:Sequent|sequent]] in [[Definition:Propositional Logic|propositional logic]]: :If we can conclude that $p$ implies $q$ and if we can also conclude that $q$ implies $p$, then we may infer that $p$ {{iff}} $q$. ==...
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q \vdash \paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{BiconditionalElimination|2|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{BiconditionalElimination|3|1|q \implies p|1|2}} {{Conjunction|4|1|\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p}|2|3}} {{EndTableau}} {{BeginTableau|\paren ...
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Biconditional", "Conditional", "Conjunction" ]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Definition:Valid Argument", "Definition:Sequent", "Definition:Propositional Logic", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2" ]
[]
proofwiki-7323
Rule of Material Equivalence
The '''Rule of Material Equivalence''' is a valid deduction sequent in propositional logic: :If we can conclude that $p$ implies $q$ and if we can also conclude that $q$ implies $p$, then we may infer that $p$ {{iff}} $q$. ==== Formulation 1 ==== {{:Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1}} ==== Formulation 2 ==== {...
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connectives match for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|ccc|ccccccc|} \hline p & \iff & q & (p & \implies & q) & \land & (q & \implies & p) \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T & \F \\ ...
The '''[[Rule of Material Equivalence]]''' is a [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid]] deduction [[Definition:Sequent|sequent]] in [[Definition:Propositional Logic|propositional logic]]: :If we can conclude that $p$ implies $q$ and if we can also conclude that $q$ implies $p$, then we may infer that $p$ {{iff}} $q$. ==...
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]]. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connectives]] match for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|ccc|ccccccc|} \hline ...
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_1/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Biconditional", "Conditional", "Conjunction" ]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Definition:Valid Argument", "Definition:Sequent", "Definition:Propositional Logic", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-7324
Rule of Material Equivalence
The '''Rule of Material Equivalence''' is a valid deduction sequent in propositional logic: :If we can conclude that $p$ implies $q$ and if we can also conclude that $q$ implies $p$, then we may infer that $p$ {{iff}} $q$. ==== Formulation 1 ==== {{:Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1}} ==== Formulation 2 ==== {...
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} } }} {{Assumption|1|p \iff q}} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1|Rule of Material Equivalence: Formulation 1}} {{Implication|3||\paren {p \iff q} \implies \paren {\paren ...
The '''[[Rule of Material Equivalence]]''' is a [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid]] deduction [[Definition:Sequent|sequent]] in [[Definition:Propositional Logic|propositional logic]]: :If we can conclude that $p$ implies $q$ and if we can also conclude that $q$ implies $p$, then we may infer that $p$ {{iff}} $q$. ==...
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} } }} {{Assumption|1|p \iff q}} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1|[[Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1|Rule of Material Equivalence: Formulation 1]]}} {{Implicatio...
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_2/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Biconditional", "Conditional", "Conjunction" ]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Definition:Valid Argument", "Definition:Sequent", "Definition:Propositional Logic", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2" ]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1" ]
proofwiki-7325
Rule of Material Equivalence
The '''Rule of Material Equivalence''' is a valid deduction sequent in propositional logic: :If we can conclude that $p$ implies $q$ and if we can also conclude that $q$ implies $p$, then we may infer that $p$ {{iff}} $q$. ==== Formulation 1 ==== {{:Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1}} ==== Formulation 2 ==== {...
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connective are true for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|ccc|c|ccccccc|} \hline (p & \iff & q) & \iff & (p & \implies & q) & \land & (q & \implies & p) \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T ...
The '''[[Rule of Material Equivalence]]''' is a [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid]] deduction [[Definition:Sequent|sequent]] in [[Definition:Propositional Logic|propositional logic]]: :If we can conclude that $p$ implies $q$ and if we can also conclude that $q$ implies $p$, then we may infer that $p$ {{iff}} $q$. ==...
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]] are [[Definition:True|true]] for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{...
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_2/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Biconditional", "Conditional", "Conjunction" ]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Definition:Valid Argument", "Definition:Sequent", "Definition:Propositional Logic", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-7326
Union of Overlapping Order-Convex Sets in Toset is Order-Convex/Infinite Union
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a totally ordered set. Let $\AA$ be a set of order-convex subsets of $S$. For any $P, Q \in \AA$, let there be elements $C_0, \dotsc, C_n \in \AA$ such that: :$C_0 = P$ :$C_n = Q$ :For $k = 0, \dotsc, n - 1: C_k \cap C_{k + 1} \ne \O$ Then $\bigcup \AA$ is order-convex in $S$.
Let $a, c \in \bigcup \AA$. Let $b \in S$. Let $a \prec b \prec c$. Since $a, c \in \bigcup \AA$, there are $P, Q \in \AA$ such that $a \in P$ and $c \in Q$. By the premise, there are elements $C_0, \dots, C_n \in \AA$ such that: :$C_0 = P$ :$C_n = Q$ :For $k = 0, \dotsc, n - 1: C_k \cap C_{k + 1} \ne \O$ {{explain|det...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Totally Ordered Set|totally ordered set]]. Let $\AA$ be a [[Definition:Set of Sets|set]] of [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]] [[Definition:Subset|subsets]] of $S$. For any $P, Q \in \AA$, let there be elements $C_0, \dotsc, C_n \in \AA$ such that: :$C_0 = P$ :$C...
Let $a, c \in \bigcup \AA$. Let $b \in S$. Let $a \prec b \prec c$. Since $a, c \in \bigcup \AA$, there are $P, Q \in \AA$ such that $a \in P$ and $c \in Q$. By the premise, there are elements $C_0, \dots, C_n \in \AA$ such that: :$C_0 = P$ :$C_n = Q$ :For $k = 0, \dotsc, n - 1: C_k \cap C_{k + 1} \ne \O$ {{explai...
Union of Overlapping Order-Convex Sets in Toset is Order-Convex/Infinite Union
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Overlapping_Order-Convex_Sets_in_Toset_is_Order-Convex/Infinite_Union
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Overlapping_Order-Convex_Sets_in_Toset_is_Order-Convex/Infinite_Union
[ "Total Orderings" ]
[ "Definition:Totally Ordered Set", "Definition:Set of Sets", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
[ "Union of Overlapping Order-Convex Sets in Toset is Order-Convex", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Category:Total Orderings" ]
proofwiki-7327
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} } }} {{Assumption|1|p \iff q}} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1|Rule of Material Equivalence: Formulation 1}} {{Implication|3||\paren {p \iff q} \implies \paren {\paren ...
:$\vdash \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} } }} {{Assumption|1|p \iff q}} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1|[[Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1|Rule of Material Equivalence: Formulation 1]]}} {{Implicatio...
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_2/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1", "Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1" ]
proofwiki-7328
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connective are true for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|ccc|c|ccccccc|} \hline (p & \iff & q) & \iff & (p & \implies & q) & \land & (q & \implies & p) \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T ...
:$\vdash \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]]. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connective]] are [[Definition:True|true]] for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{...
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 2/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_2/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-7329
Continuous Involution is Homeomorphism
Let $\struct {S, \tau}$ be a topological space. Let $f: S \to S$ be a continuous involution. Then $f$ is a homeomorphism.
From Involution is Permutation, $f$ is a permutation and so a bijection. Since $f$ is continuous, it suffices to verify that its inverse is also continuous. Now recall $f$ is an involution, that is, $f^{-1} = f$. Thus $f^{-1}$ is also continuous. Hence $f$ is a homeomorphism. {{qed}} Category:Continuous Mappings Catego...
Let $\struct {S, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Topological Space|topological space]]. Let $f: S \to S$ be a [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|continuous]] [[Definition:Involution (Mapping)|involution]]. Then $f$ is a [[Definition:Homeomorphism (Topological Spaces)|homeomorphism]].
From [[Involution is Permutation]], $f$ is a [[Definition:Permutation|permutation]] and so a [[Definition:Bijection|bijection]]. Since $f$ is [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|continuous]], it suffices to verify that its [[Definition:Inverse Mapping|inverse]] is also [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)...
Continuous Involution is Homeomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Continuous_Involution_is_Homeomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Continuous_Involution_is_Homeomorphism
[ "Continuous Mappings", "Homeomorphisms (Topological Spaces)", "Involutions" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Involution (Mapping)", "Definition:Homeomorphism/Topological Spaces" ]
[ "Involution is Permutation", "Definition:Permutation", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Inverse Mapping", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Involution (Mapping)", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Homeomorphis...
proofwiki-7330
Involution is Permutation
Let $S$ be a set. Let $f: S \to S$ be an involution. Then $f$ is a permutation.
By definition, a permutation is a bijection from a set to itself. Thus it is sufficient to show that $f$ is a bijection. By definition of involution, for each $x \in S$: :$\map f {\map f x} = x$ By Equality of Mappings: :$f \circ f = I_S$ where $I_S$ is the identity mapping on $S$. Thus $f$ is both a left inverse and a...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $f: S \to S$ be an [[Definition:Involution (Mapping)|involution]]. Then $f$ is a [[Definition:Permutation|permutation]].
By definition, a [[Definition:Permutation|permutation]] is a [[Definition:Bijection|bijection]] from a [[Definition:Set|set]] to itself. Thus it is sufficient to show that $f$ is a [[Definition:Bijection|bijection]]. By definition of [[Definition:Involution (Mapping)|involution]], for each $x \in S$: :$\map f {\map f...
Involution is Permutation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Involution_is_Permutation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Involution_is_Permutation
[ "Involutions", "Permutations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Involution (Mapping)", "Definition:Permutation" ]
[ "Definition:Permutation", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Involution (Mapping)", "Equality of Mappings", "Definition:Identity Mapping", "Definition:Left Inverse Mapping", "Definition:Right Inverse Mapping", "Bijection iff Left and Right Inverse", "Ca...
proofwiki-7331
Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions/Formulation 1/Forward Implication
: $\neg \left ({p \iff q}\right) \vdash \left({\neg p \land q}\right) \lor \left({p \land \neg q}\right)$
{{BeginTableau|\neg \paren {p \iff q} \vdash \paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} }} {{Premise|1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\neg \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1 |Rule of Material Equivalence}} {{SequentIntro|3|1|\neg \paren {\paren {\neg p \lor q} \land ...
: $\neg \left ({p \iff q}\right) \vdash \left({\neg p \land q}\right) \lor \left({p \land \neg q}\right)$
{{BeginTableau|\neg \paren {p \iff q} \vdash \paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} }} {{Premise|1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\neg \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1 |[[Rule of Material Equivalence]]}} {{SequentIntro|3|1|\neg \paren {\paren {\neg p \lor q} \l...
Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Disjunction_of_Conjunctions/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Disjunction_of_Conjunctions/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Rule of Material Implication" ]
proofwiki-7332
Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication
: $\left({\neg p \land q}\right) \lor \left({p \land \neg q}\right) \vdash \neg \left ({p \iff q}\right)$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} \vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{Premise|1|\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} }} {{Commutation|2|1|\paren {p \land \neg q} \lor \paren {\neg p \land q}|1|Disjunction}} {{Commutation|3|1|\paren {p \land \neg q} \lor \paren {q \land \...
: $\left({\neg p \land q}\right) \lor \left({p \land \neg q}\right) \vdash \neg \left ({p \iff q}\right)$
{{BeginTableau|\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} \vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{Premise|1|\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} }} {{Commutation|2|1|\paren {p \land \neg q} \lor \paren {\neg p \land q}|1|Disjunction}} {{Commutation|3|1|\paren {p \land \neg q} \lor \paren {q \land \...
Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Disjunction_of_Conjunctions/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Disjunction_of_Conjunctions/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Material Implication", "Rule of Material Equivalence" ]
proofwiki-7333
Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {\neg \paren {p \iff q} } \iff \paren {\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg \paren {p \iff q} } \iff \paren {\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} } }} {{Assumption|1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q}|1|Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions: Formulation 1}} {{Implication|3...
:$\vdash \paren {\neg \paren {p \iff q} } \iff \paren {\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} }$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg \paren {p \iff q} } \iff \paren {\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q} } }} {{Assumption|1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|\paren {\neg p \land q} \lor \paren {p \land \neg q}|1|[[Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions/Formulation 1|Non-Equivalence ...
Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions/Formulation 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Disjunction_of_Conjunctions/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Disjunction_of_Conjunctions/Formulation_2
[ "Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions" ]
[]
[ "Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions/Formulation 1", "Non-Equivalence as Disjunction of Conjunctions/Formulation 1" ]
proofwiki-7334
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\neg \paren {p \iff q} \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q} }} {{Premise | 1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro | 2|1|\neg \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1|Rule of Material Equivalence}} {{DeMorgan | 3|1|\neg \paren {p \implies q} \lor \neg \paren...
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\neg \paren {p \iff q} \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q} }} {{Premise | 1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro | 2|1|\neg \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1|[[Rule of Material Equivalence]]}} {{DeMorgan | 3|1|\neg \paren {p \implies q} \lor \neg \p...
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Conjunction with Negative is Equivalent to Negation of Conditional", "Rule of Transposition", "Conjunction with Negative is Equivalent to Negation of Conditional" ]
proofwiki-7335
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \dashv \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\neg \paren {p \iff q} \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q} }} {{Premise | 1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro | 2|1|\neg \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1|Rule of Material Equivalence}} {{DeMorgan | 3|1|\neg \paren {p \implies q} \lor \neg \paren...
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \dashv \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\neg \paren {p \iff q} \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q} }} {{Premise | 1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro | 2|1|\neg \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }|1|[[Rule of Material Equivalence]]}} {{DeMorgan | 3|1|\neg \paren {p \implies q} \lor \neg \p...
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence", "Conjunction with Negative is Equivalent to Negation of Conditional", "Rule of Transposition", "Conjunction with Negative is Equivalent to Negation of Conditional" ]
proofwiki-7336
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \dashv \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
=== Forward Implication: Proof === {{:Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof}} === Reverse Implication: Proof === {{:Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof}}
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \dashv \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
=== [[Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof|Forward Implication: Proof]] === {{:Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof}} === [[Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof|Reverse Implica...
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation" ]
[]
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof", "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof" ]
proofwiki-7337
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \dashv \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connectives match for all boolean interpretations. $\begin{array}{|cccc||cccc|} \hline \neg & (p & \iff & q) & (p & \iff & \neg & q) \\ \hline \F & \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T & \F \\ \T & \F & \F & \T & \T & \T & \F & \T...
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \dashv \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
We apply the [[Method of Truth Tables]]. As can be seen by inspection, the [[Definition:Truth Value|truth values]] under the [[Definition:Main Connective (Propositional Logic)|main connectives]] match for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. $\begin{array}{|cccc||cccc|} \hline \neg & (p...
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-7338
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \dashv \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau | \paren {p \iff \neg q} \vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{Premise | 1 | p \iff \neg q}} {{SequentIntro | 2 | 1 |\neg \paren {p \iff \neg \neg q} | 1 | Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation: Forward Implication}} {{TheoremIntro | 3 | \neg \neg q \iff q | Double Negation}} {{SequentIntro | 4 ...
:$\neg \paren {p \iff q} \dashv \vdash \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau | \paren {p \iff \neg q} \vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{Premise | 1 | p \iff \neg q}} {{SequentIntro | 2 | 1 |\neg \paren {p \iff \neg \neg q} | 1 | [[Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication|Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation: Forward Implication]...
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation" ]
[]
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication", "Double Negation", "Biconditional is Transitive" ]
proofwiki-7339
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication
:$\paren {p \iff \neg q} \vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q}$
{{BeginTableau | \paren {p \iff \neg q} \vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{Premise | 1 | p \iff \neg q}} {{SequentIntro | 2 | 1 |\neg \paren {p \iff \neg \neg q} | 1 | Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation: Forward Implication}} {{TheoremIntro | 3 | \neg \neg q \iff q | Double Negation}} {{SequentIntro | 4 ...
:$\paren {p \iff \neg q} \vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q}$
{{BeginTableau | \paren {p \iff \neg q} \vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{Premise | 1 | p \iff \neg q}} {{SequentIntro | 2 | 1 |\neg \paren {p \iff \neg \neg q} | 1 | [[Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication|Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation: Forward Implication]...
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation" ]
[]
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1/Forward Implication", "Double Negation", "Biconditional is Transitive" ]
proofwiki-7340
Sign of Function Matches Sign of Definite Integral
Let $f$ be a real function continuous on some closed interval $\closedint a b$, where $a < b$. Then: :If $\forall x \in \closedint a b: \map f x \ge 0$ then $\ds \int_a^b \map f x \rd x \ge 0$ :If $\forall x \in \closedint a b: \map f x > 0$ then $\ds \int_a^b \map f x \rd x > 0$ :If $\forall x \in \closedint a b: \map...
From Continuous Real Function is Darboux Integrable, the definite integrals under discussion are guaranteed to exist. Consider the case where $\forall x \in \closedint a b: \map f x \ge 0$. Define a constant mapping: :$f_0: \closedint a b \to \R$: :$\map {f_0} x = 0$ Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map {f_0} x |...
Let $f$ be a [[Definition:Real Function|real function]] [[Definition:Continuous Real Function on Interval|continuous]] on some [[Definition:Closed Real Interval|closed interval]] $\closedint a b$, where $a < b$. Then: :If $\forall x \in \closedint a b: \map f x \ge 0$ then $\ds \int_a^b \map f x \rd x \ge 0$ :If $\f...
From [[Continuous Real Function is Darboux Integrable]], the [[Definition:Definite Integral|definite integrals]] under discussion are guaranteed to exist. Consider the case where $\forall x \in \closedint a b: \map f x \ge 0$. Define a [[Definition:Constant Mapping|constant mapping]]: :$f_0: \closedint a b \to \R$: ...
Sign of Function Matches Sign of Definite Integral
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sign_of_Function_Matches_Sign_of_Definite_Integral
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sign_of_Function_Matches_Sign_of_Definite_Integral
[ "Integral Calculus" ]
[ "Definition:Real Function", "Definition:Continuous Real Function/Interval", "Definition:Real Interval/Closed" ]
[ "Continuous Real Function is Darboux Integrable", "Definition:Definite Integral", "Definition:Constant Mapping", "Relative Sizes of Definite Integrals", "Integral of Constant/Definite", "Category:Integral Calculus" ]
proofwiki-7341
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {p \iff \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|p \iff \neg q|1|Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation: Formulation 1}} {{Implication|3||\paren {\neg \paren {p \iff q} } \implies \paren {p \iff \neg q}|1|2}} {{Assumption|4|p \...
:$\vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {p \iff \neg q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \neg \paren {p \iff q} \iff \paren {p \iff \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg \paren {p \iff q} }} {{SequentIntro|2|1|p \iff \neg q|1|[[Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1|Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation: Formulation 1]]}} {{Implication|3||\paren {\neg \paren {p \if...
Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Equivalence_as_Equivalence_with_Negation/Formulation_2
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation" ]
[]
[ "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1", "Non-Equivalence as Equivalence with Negation/Formulation 1" ]
proofwiki-7342
Transitive Relation whose Symmetric Closure is not Transitive
Let $S = \set {p, q}$, where $p$ and $q$ are distinct elements. Let $\RR = \set {\tuple {p, q} }$. Then $\RR$ is transitive but its symmetric closure is not.
$\RR$ is vacuously transitive because there are no elements $a, b, c \in S$ such that $a \mathrel \RR b$ and $b \mathrel \RR c$. Let $\RR^\leftrightarrow$ be the symmetric closure of $\RR$. Then $\RR^\leftrightarrow = \RR \cup \RR^{-1} = \set {\tuple {p, q}, \tuple {q, p} }$. Then: :$p \mathrel {\RR^\leftrightarrow} q$...
Let $S = \set {p, q}$, where $p$ and $q$ are distinct elements. Let $\RR = \set {\tuple {p, q} }$. Then $\RR$ is [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]] but its [[Definition:Symmetric Closure|symmetric closure]] is not.
$\RR$ is vacuously [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]] because there are no elements $a, b, c \in S$ such that $a \mathrel \RR b$ and $b \mathrel \RR c$. Let $\RR^\leftrightarrow$ be the [[Definition:Symmetric Closure|symmetric closure]] of $\RR$. Then $\RR^\leftrightarrow = \RR \cup \RR^{-1} = \set {\tuple...
Transitive Relation whose Symmetric Closure is not Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Relation_whose_Symmetric_Closure_is_not_Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Relation_whose_Symmetric_Closure_is_not_Transitive
[ "Transitive Relations", "Symmetric Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Symmetric Closure" ]
[ "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Symmetric Closure", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Category:Transitive Relations", "Category:Symmetric Closures" ]
proofwiki-7343
Symmetric Closure of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a magma. Let $\RR$ be a relation compatible with $\circ$. Let $\RR^\leftrightarrow$ denote the symmetric closure of $\RR$. Then $\RR^\leftrightarrow$ is compatible with $\circ$.
By the definition of symmetric closure: :$\RR^\leftrightarrow = \RR \cup \RR^{-1}$. Here $\RR^{-1}$ is the inverse of $\RR$. By Inverse of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible, $\RR^{-1}$ is compatible with $\circ$. Thus by Union of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible: :$\RR^\leftrightarrow = ...
Let $\struct {S, \circ}$ be a [[Definition:Magma|magma]]. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation|compatible]] with $\circ$. Let $\RR^\leftrightarrow$ denote the [[Definition:Symmetric Closure|symmetric closure]] of $\RR$. Then $\RR^\leftrightarrow$ is [[D...
By the definition of [[Definition:Symmetric Closure|symmetric closure]]: :$\RR^\leftrightarrow = \RR \cup \RR^{-1}$. Here $\RR^{-1}$ is the [[Definition:Inverse Relation|inverse]] of $\RR$. By [[Inverse of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible]], $\RR^{-1}$ is [[Definition:Relation Compatible with Operati...
Symmetric Closure of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Symmetric_Closure_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Symmetric_Closure_of_Relation_Compatible_with_Operation_is_Compatible
[ "Compatible Relations", "Symmetric Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Magma", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Definition:Symmetric Closure", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
[ "Definition:Symmetric Closure", "Definition:Inverse Relation", "Inverse of Relation Compatible with Operation is Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Union of Relations Compatible with Operation is Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Category:Compatib...
proofwiki-7344
Singleton is Order-Convex Set
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $x \in S$. Then the singleton $\set x$ is order-convex.
Let: :$a, c \in \set x$ :$b \in S$ :$a \preceq b \preceq c$ Then $a = c = x$. Thus $x \preceq b \preceq x$. Since $\preceq$ is a ordering, it is antisymmetric. Thus $b = x$, so $b \in \set x$. Since this holds for the only such triple, $\set x$ is order-convex. {{qed}} Category:Order-Convex Sets Category:Singletons cij...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $x \in S$. Then the [[Definition:Singleton|singleton]] $\set x$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]].
Let: :$a, c \in \set x$ :$b \in S$ :$a \preceq b \preceq c$ Then $a = c = x$. Thus $x \preceq b \preceq x$. Since $\preceq$ is a [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]], it is [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]]. Thus $b = x$, so $b \in \set x$. Since this holds for the only such triple, $\set x$ is [[Def...
Singleton is Order-Convex Set
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Singleton_is_Order-Convex_Set
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Singleton_is_Order-Convex_Set
[ "Order-Convex Sets", "Singletons" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Singleton", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Category:Order-Convex Sets", "Category:Singletons" ]
proofwiki-7345
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \neg q} \iff \paren {q \implies \neg p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \implies \neg q} \implies \paren {q \implies \neg p} }} {{Assumption|1|p \implies \neg q}} {{Assumption|2|q}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg q|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg p|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|q \implies \neg p|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {p \implies \neg q} \implies \paren {q \...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \neg q} \iff \paren {q \implies \neg p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \implies \neg q} \implies \paren {q \implies \neg p} }} {{Assumption|1|p \implies \neg q}} {{Assumption|2|q}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg q|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg p|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|q \implies \neg p|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {p \implies \neg q} \implies \paren {q \...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7346
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \neg q} \iff \paren {q \implies \neg p}$
=== Proof of Forward Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof}} === Proof of Reverse Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof}} {{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {p \implies \neg q} \iff \paren {q \implies \neg p} }} {{Theore...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \neg q} \iff \paren {q \implies \neg p}$
=== [[Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof|Proof of Forward Implication]] === {{:Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof}} === [[Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof|Proof of Reverse Implication]] === {{:Rule of Trans...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_2/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof", "Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof", "Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Forward Implication", "Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication" ]
proofwiki-7347
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \neg q} \iff \paren {q \implies \neg p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \implies \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|q \implies \neg p}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg p|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg q|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|p \implies \neg q|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \...
:$\vdash \paren {p \implies \neg q} \iff \paren {q \implies \neg p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \implies \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|q \implies \neg p}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg p|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg q|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|p \implies \neg q|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7348
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication
: $\vdash \left({q \implies \neg p}\right) \implies \left({p \implies \neg q}\right)$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \implies \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|q \implies \neg p}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg p|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg q|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|p \implies \neg q|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \...
: $\vdash \left({q \implies \neg p}\right) \implies \left({p \implies \neg q}\right)$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \implies \neg q} }} {{Assumption|1|q \implies \neg p}} {{Assumption|2|p}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg p|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg q|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|p \implies \neg q|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {q \implies \neg p} \implies \paren {p \...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7349
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1
:$p \implies \neg q \dashv \vdash q \implies \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|p \implies \neg q \vdash q \implies \neg p}} {{Premise|1|p \implies \neg q}} {{Assumption|2|q}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg q|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg p|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|q \implies \neg p|2|4}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
:$p \implies \neg q \dashv \vdash q \implies \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|p \implies \neg q \vdash q \implies \neg p}} {{Premise|1|p \implies \neg q}} {{Assumption|2|q}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg q|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg p|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|q \implies \neg p|2|4}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7350
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1
:$p \implies \neg q \dashv \vdash q \implies \neg p$
=== Proof of Forward Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof}} === Proof of Reverse Implication === {{:Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof}}
:$p \implies \neg q \dashv \vdash q \implies \neg p$
=== [[Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof|Proof of Forward Implication]] === {{:Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof}} === [[Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof|Proof of Reverse Implication]] === {{:Rule of Trans...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof", "Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof" ]
proofwiki-7351
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1
:$p \implies \neg q \dashv \vdash q \implies \neg p$
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>$\begin{array}{|cccc||cccc|} \hline p & \implies & \neg & q & q & \implies & \neg & p \\ \hline \F & \T & \T & \F & \F & \T & \T & \F \\ \F & ...
:$p \implies \neg q \dashv \vdash 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>$\begin{array}{|cc...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_1/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-7352
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Forward Implication
:$p \implies \neg q \vdash q \implies \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|p \implies \neg q \vdash q \implies \neg p}} {{Premise|1|p \implies \neg q}} {{Assumption|2|q}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg q|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg p|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|q \implies \neg p|2|4}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
:$p \implies \neg q \vdash q \implies \neg p$
{{BeginTableau|p \implies \neg q \vdash q \implies \neg p}} {{Premise|1|p \implies \neg q}} {{Assumption|2|q}} {{DoubleNegIntro|3|2|\neg \neg q|2}} {{ModusTollens|4|1, 2|\neg p|1|3}} {{Implication|5|1|q \implies \neg p|2|4}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
Rule of Transposition/Variant 1/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_1/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7353
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1
: $\neg p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p}} {{Premise|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
: $\neg p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p}} {{Premise|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7354
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1
: $\neg p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies p$
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. $\begin{array}{|cccc||cccc|} \hline \neg & p & \implies & q & \neg & q & \implies & p \\ \hline \T & \F & \T & \F & \T & \F & \T & \F \\ \T & \F & \T &...
: $\neg p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies p$
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]]. $\begin{array}{|cccc||cccc...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-7355
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1
: $\neg p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\neg q \implies p \vdash \neg p \implies q}} {{Premise|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
: $\neg p \implies q \dashv \vdash \neg q \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\neg q \implies p \vdash \neg p \implies q}} {{Premise|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7356
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Forward Implication
:$\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p}} {{Premise|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
:$\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p}} {{Premise|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7357
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof
: $\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p}} {{Premise|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
: $\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p$
{{BeginTableau|\neg p \implies q \vdash \neg q \implies p}} {{Premise|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7358
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication
: $q \implies \neg p \vdash p \implies \neg q$
{{BeginTableau|\neg q \implies p \vdash \neg p \implies q}} {{Premise|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
: $q \implies \neg p \vdash p \implies \neg q$
{{BeginTableau|\neg q \implies p \vdash \neg p \implies q}} {{Premise|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7359
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof
: $\neg q \implies p \vdash \neg p \implies q$
{{BeginTableau|\neg q \implies p \vdash \neg p \implies q}} {{Premise|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
: $\neg q \implies p \vdash \neg p \implies q$
{{BeginTableau|\neg q \implies p \vdash \neg p \implies q}} {{Premise|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{EndTableau|qed}} {{LEM|Double Negation Elimination|3}}
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 1/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_1/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7360
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Forward Implication
:$\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies p} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \p...
:$\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies p} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \p...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7361
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication
:$\vdash \paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \paren {\neg p \implies q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \paren {\neg p \implies q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \p...
:$\vdash \paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \paren {\neg p \implies q}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \paren {\neg p \implies q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \p...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7362
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q}\ \iff \paren {\neg q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies p} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \p...
:$\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q}\ \iff \paren {\neg q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies p} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg p \implies q}} {{Assumption|2|\neg q}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg p|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|p|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg q \implies p|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \p...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Forward Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2/Forward_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7363
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q}\ \iff \paren {\neg q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies p} }} {{TheoremIntro|1|\paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies p}|Rule of Transposition: Forward Implication}} {{TheoremIntro|2|\paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \paren {\neg p \implies q}|Rule of Transposition: Reverse ...
:$\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q}\ \iff \paren {\neg q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q} \iff \paren {\neg q \implies p} }} {{TheoremIntro|1|\paren {\neg p \implies q} \implies \paren {\neg q \implies p}|[[Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Forward Implication|Rule of Transposition: Forward Implication]]}} {{TheoremIntro|2|\paren {\neg q \implies ...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[ "Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Forward Implication", "Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication" ]
proofwiki-7364
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2
:$\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q}\ \iff \paren {\neg q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \paren {\neg p \implies q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \p...
:$\vdash \paren {\neg p \implies q}\ \iff \paren {\neg q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \paren {\neg p \implies q} }} {{Assumption|1|\neg q \implies p}} {{Assumption|2|\neg p}} {{ModusTollens|3|1, 2|\neg \neg q|1|2}} {{DoubleNegElimination|4|1, 2|q|3}} {{Implication|5|1|\neg p \implies q|2|4}} {{Implication|6||\paren {\neg q \implies p} \implies \p...
Rule of Transposition/Variant 2/Formulation 2/Reverse Implication/Proof
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Transposition/Variant_2/Formulation_2/Reverse_Implication/Proof
[ "Rule of Transposition" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7365
Boundary of Polygon is Topological Boundary
Let $P$ be a polygon embedded in $\R^2$. Denote the boundary of $P$ as $\partial P$. Let $\Int P$ and $\Ext P$ denote the interior and exterior of $\partial P$, where $\partial P$ is considered as a Jordan curve. Then the topological boundary of $\Int P$ is equal to $\partial P$, and the topological boundary of $\Ext P...
Denote the topological boundary of $\Int P$ as $\partial \Int P$, and denote the topological boundary of $\Ext P$ as $\partial \Ext P$.
Let $P$ be a [[Definition:Polygon|polygon]] embedded in $\R^2$. Denote the [[Definition:Boundary (Geometry)|boundary]] of $P$ as $\partial P$. Let $\Int P$ and $\Ext P$ denote the [[Definition:Interior of Jordan Curve|interior]] and [[Definition:Exterior of Jordan Curve|exterior]] of $\partial P$, where $\partial P$ ...
Denote the [[Definition:Boundary (Topology)|topological boundary]] of $\Int P$ as $\partial \Int P$, and denote the [[Definition:Boundary (Topology)|topological boundary]] of $\Ext P$ as $\partial \Ext P$.
Boundary of Polygon is Topological Boundary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Boundary_of_Polygon_is_Topological_Boundary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Boundary_of_Polygon_is_Topological_Boundary
[ "Plane Geometry", "Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Polygon", "Definition:Boundary (Geometry)", "Definition:Jordan Curve/Interior", "Definition:Jordan Curve/Exterior", "Definition:Jordan Curve", "Definition:Boundary (Topology)", "Definition:Boundary (Topology)" ]
[ "Definition:Boundary (Topology)", "Definition:Boundary (Topology)" ]
proofwiki-7366
Convex Component of Open Set in GO-Space is Open
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be a generalized ordered space. Let $A$ be a $\tau$-open subset of $S$. Let $C$ be a convex component of $A$ in $S$ Then $C$ is open relative to $\tau$.
Note: the term '''convex''' will be used here to refer to a set that is order-convex in $S$. Since $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ is a generalized ordered space, $\tau$ has a basis $\BB$ consisting of open convex sets. Let $x \in C$. Then $x \in A$, and $A$ is open in $S$. Thus by the definition of a basis, there is a $U...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space|generalized ordered space]]. Let $A$ be a $\tau$-open subset of $S$. Let $C$ be a convex component of $A$ in $S$ Then $C$ is open relative to $\tau$.
Note: the term '''convex''' will be used here to refer to a set that is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]] in $S$. Since $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ is a [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space|generalized ordered space]], $\tau$ has a [[Definition:Basis (Topology)|basis]] $\BB$ consisting of open convex set...
Convex Component of Open Set in GO-Space is Open
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Convex_Component_of_Open_Set_in_GO-Space_is_Open
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Convex_Component_of_Open_Set_in_GO-Space_is_Open
[ "Generalized Ordered Spaces", "Total Orderings" ]
[ "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space" ]
[ "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space", "Definition:Basis (Topology)", "Category:Generalized Ordered Spaces", "Category:Total Orderings" ]
proofwiki-7367
Jordan Curve and Jordan Arc form Two Jordan Curves
Let $\gamma: \closedint a b \to \R^2$ be a Jordan curve, where $\closedint a b$ is the closed real interval between $a, b \in \R$ with $a < b$. Let the interior of $\gamma$ be denoted $\Int \gamma$. Let the image of $\gamma$ be denoted $\Img \gamma$. Let $\sigma: \closedint c d \to \R^2$ be a Jordan arc such that: :$\m...
=== $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ are Jordan curves === Let $\closedint {a_1}{b_1}$ denote the domain of $\gamma_1$, and $\closedint {a_2}{b_2}$ denote the domain of $\gamma_2$. As: :$\Int \gamma$ and $\Img \gamma$ are disjoint by the Jordan Curve Theorem and: :$\map \sigma {\openint c d} \subseteq \Int \gamma$ it follows ...
Let $\gamma: \closedint a b \to \R^2$ be a [[Definition:Jordan Curve|Jordan curve]], where $\closedint a b$ is the [[Definition:Closed Real Interval|closed real interval]] between $a, b \in \R$ with $a < b$. Let the [[Definition:Interior of Jordan Curve|interior]] of $\gamma$ be denoted $\Int \gamma$. Let the [[Defin...
=== $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ are [[Definition:Jordan Curve|Jordan curves]] === Let $\closedint {a_1}{b_1}$ denote the [[Definition:Domain of Mapping|domain]] of $\gamma_1$, and $\closedint {a_2}{b_2}$ denote the [[Definition:Domain of Mapping|domain]] of $\gamma_2$. As: :$\Int \gamma$ and $\Img \gamma$ are [[Definit...
Jordan Curve and Jordan Arc form Two Jordan Curves
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Jordan_Curve_and_Jordan_Arc_form_Two_Jordan_Curves
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Jordan_Curve_and_Jordan_Arc_form_Two_Jordan_Curves
[ "Jordan Curves", "Jordan Arcs" ]
[ "Definition:Jordan Curve", "Definition:Real Interval/Closed", "Definition:Jordan Curve/Interior", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping", "Definition:Jordan Arc", "Definition:Concatenation (Topology)", "Definition:Restriction/Mapping", "Definition:Jordan Curve" ]
[ "Definition:Jordan Curve", "Definition:Domain (Set Theory)/Mapping", "Definition:Domain (Set Theory)/Mapping", "Definition:Disjoint Sets", "Jordan Curve Theorem", "Definition:Jordan Curve", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Path (Topology)/Initial Point", "Definition:Path (Topology)/Final P...
proofwiki-7368
Restriction of Total Ordering is Total Ordering
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a total ordering. Let $T \subseteq S$. Let $\preceq \restriction_T$ be the restriction of $\preceq$ to $T$. Then $\preceq \restriction_T$ is a total ordering of $T$.
By Restriction of Ordering is Ordering, $\preceq \restriction_T$ is an ordering. Let $x, y \in T$. As $T \subseteq S$ it follows by definition of subset that: :$x, y \in S$ As $\preceq$ is a total ordering: :$\tuple {x, y} \in {\preceq}$ or: :$\tuple {y, x} \in {\preceq}$ Suppose $\tuple {x, y} \in {\preceq}$. As $x, y...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Total Ordering|total ordering]]. Let $T \subseteq S$. Let $\preceq \restriction_T$ be the [[Definition:Restriction of Ordering|restriction]] of $\preceq$ to $T$. Then $\preceq \restriction_T$ is a [[Definition:Total Ordering|total ordering]] of $T$.
By [[Restriction of Ordering is Ordering]], $\preceq \restriction_T$ is an [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]]. Let $x, y \in T$. As $T \subseteq S$ it follows by definition of [[Definition:Subset|subset]] that: :$x, y \in S$ As $\preceq$ is a [[Definition:Total Ordering|total ordering]]: :$\tuple {x, y} \in {\preceq}$...
Restriction of Total Ordering is Total Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Restriction_of_Total_Ordering_is_Total_Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Restriction_of_Total_Ordering_is_Total_Ordering
[ "Total Orderings" ]
[ "Definition:Total Ordering", "Definition:Restriction of Ordering", "Definition:Total Ordering" ]
[ "Restriction of Ordering is Ordering", "Definition:Ordering", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Total Ordering", "Definition:Cartesian Product", "Definition:Restriction of Ordering", "Definition:Total Ordering" ]
proofwiki-7369
Ordering Cycle implies Equality/General Case
Let $\struct {S,\preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $x_0, x_1, \dots, x_n \in S$. Suppose that for $k = 0, 1, \dots, n - 1: x_k \preceq x_{k + 1}$. Suppose also that $x_n \preceq x_0$. Then $x_0 = x_1 = \dots = x_n$.
Since $\preceq$ is an ordering it is transitive and antisymmetric. By Transitive Chaining, it follows from the first premise that for all $k$ with $0 \le k \le n$: :$x_0 \preceq x_k$ and also: :$x_k \preceq x_n$ The other premise states that $x_n \preceq x_0$. By transitivity of $\preceq$, this combines with the above ...
Let $\struct {S,\preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $x_0, x_1, \dots, x_n \in S$. Suppose that for $k = 0, 1, \dots, n - 1: x_k \preceq x_{k + 1}$. Suppose also that $x_n \preceq x_0$. Then $x_0 = x_1 = \dots = x_n$.
Since $\preceq$ is an [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]] it is [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]] and [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]]. By [[Transitive Chaining]], it follows from the first premise that for all $k$ with $0 \le k \le n$: :$x_0 \preceq x_k$ and also: :$x_k \preceq x_n$ Th...
Ordering Cycle implies Equality/General Case
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Cycle_implies_Equality/General_Case
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Cycle_implies_Equality/General_Case
[ "Order Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Transitive Chaining", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation" ]
proofwiki-7370
Finite Non-Empty Subset of Ordered Set has Maximal and Minimal Elements
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $T \subseteq S$ be a finite, non-empty subset of $S$. Then $T$ has a maximal element and a minimal element.
We will show that each finite subset of $S$ has a minimal element. The existence of a maximal element then follows from duality. Proof by induction: For all $n \in \Z_{\ge 1}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :Every set with $n$ elements has a minimal element.
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $T \subseteq S$ be a [[Definition:Finite Set|finite]], [[Definition:Non-Empty Set|non-empty]] [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $S$. Then $T$ has a [[Definition:Maximal Element|maximal element]] and a [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal elem...
We will show that each finite subset of $S$ has a [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal element]]. The existence of a [[Definition:Maximal Element|maximal element]] then follows from duality. Proof by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]]: For all $n \in \Z_{\ge 1}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Pr...
Finite Non-Empty Subset of Ordered Set has Maximal and Minimal Elements
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finite_Non-Empty_Subset_of_Ordered_Set_has_Maximal_and_Minimal_Elements
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finite_Non-Empty_Subset_of_Ordered_Set_has_Maximal_and_Minimal_Elements
[ "Minimal Elements", "Maximal Elements" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Finite Set", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Maximal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element" ]
[ "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Maximal/Element", "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Proposition", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Ele...
proofwiki-7371
Star Convex Set is Path-Connected
Let $A$ be a star convex subset of a topological vector space $V$ over $\R$ or $\C$. Then $A$ is path-connected.
Let $x_1, x_2 \in A$. Let $a \in A$ be a star center of $A$. By definition of star convex set: :$\forall t \in \closedint 0 1: x_1 + \paren {1 - t} a, t x_2 + \paren {1 - t} a \in A$ Define two paths $\gamma_1, \gamma_2: t \in \closedint 0 1 \to A$ by: :$\map {\gamma_1} t = t x_1 + \paren {1 - t} a$ :$\map {\gamma_2} ...
Let $A$ be a [[Definition:Star Convex Set|star convex]] [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of a [[Definition:Topological Vector Space|topological vector space]] $V$ over $\R$ or $\C$. Then $A$ is [[Definition:Path-Connected Set|path-connected]].
Let $x_1, x_2 \in A$. Let $a \in A$ be a [[Definition:Star Center|star center]] of $A$. By definition of [[Definition:Star Convex Set|star convex set]]: :$\forall t \in \closedint 0 1: x_1 + \paren {1 - t} a, t x_2 + \paren {1 - t} a \in A$ Define two [[Definition:Path (Topology)|paths]] $\gamma_1, \gamma_2: t \in...
Star Convex Set is Path-Connected
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Star_Convex_Set_is_Path-Connected
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Star_Convex_Set_is_Path-Connected
[ "Vector Spaces", "Path-Connected Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Star Convex Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Topological Vector Space", "Definition:Path-Connected/Set" ]
[ "Definition:Star Convex Set/Star Center", "Definition:Star Convex Set", "Definition:Path (Topology)", "Definition:Topological Vector Space", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)/Set", "Definition:Concatenation (Topology)", "Definition:Path (Topology)", "Definition:Path-Connected/Set" ]
proofwiki-7372
Minimal Element of Chain is Smallest Element
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $C$ be a chain in $S$. Let $m$ be a minimal element of $C$. Then $m$ is the smallest element of $C$.
Let $x \in C$. Since $m$ is minimal in $C$, $x \nprec m$. Since $C$ is a chain, $x = m$ or $m \prec x$. Thus for each $x \in C$, $m \preceq x$. Therefore $m$ is the smallest element of $C$. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $C$ be a [[Definition:Chain (Order Theory)|chain]] in $S$. Let $m$ be a [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal element]] of $C$. Then $m$ is the [[Definition:Smallest Element|smallest element]] of $C$.
Let $x \in C$. Since $m$ is [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal]] in $C$, $x \nprec m$. Since $C$ is a [[Definition:Chain (Order Theory)|chain]], $x = m$ or $m \prec x$. Thus for each $x \in C$, $m \preceq x$. Therefore $m$ is the [[Definition:Smallest Element|smallest element]] of $C$. {{qed}}
Minimal Element of Chain is Smallest Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Minimal_Element_of_Chain_is_Smallest_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Minimal_Element_of_Chain_is_Smallest_Element
[ "Minimal Elements", "Smallest Elements" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Chain (Order Theory)", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Smallest Element" ]
[ "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Chain (Order Theory)", "Definition:Smallest Element" ]
proofwiki-7373
Maximal Element of Chain is Greatest Element
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $C$ be a chain in $S$. Let $m$ be a maximal element of $C$. Then $m$ is the greatest element of $C$.
Let $x \in C$. Since $m$ is maximal in $C$, $m \nprec x$. Since $C$ is a chain, $x = m$ or $x \prec m$. Thus for each $x \in C$, $x \preceq m$. Therefore $m$ is the greatest element of $C$. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $C$ be a [[Definition:Chain (Order Theory)|chain]] in $S$. Let $m$ be a [[Definition:Maximal Element|maximal element]] of $C$. Then $m$ is the [[Definition:Greatest Element|greatest element]] of $C$.
Let $x \in C$. Since $m$ is [[Definition:Maximal Element|maximal]] in $C$, $m \nprec x$. Since $C$ is a [[Definition:Chain (Order Theory)|chain]], $x = m$ or $x \prec m$. Thus for each $x \in C$, $x \preceq m$. Therefore $m$ is the [[Definition:Greatest Element|greatest element]] of $C$. {{qed}}
Maximal Element of Chain is Greatest Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Maximal_Element_of_Chain_is_Greatest_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Maximal_Element_of_Chain_is_Greatest_Element
[ "Maximal Elements", "Greatest Elements", "Chains (Order Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Chain (Order Theory)", "Definition:Maximal/Element", "Definition:Greatest Element" ]
[ "Definition:Maximal/Element", "Definition:Chain (Order Theory)", "Definition:Greatest Element" ]
proofwiki-7374
Modus Ponendo Ponens/Variant 3
:$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land p} \implies q$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land p} \implies q}} {{Assumption|1|\paren {p \implies q} \land p}} {{Simplification|2|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{Simplification|3|1|p|1|2}} {{ModusPonens|4|1|q|2|3}} {{Implication|5||\paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land p} \implies q|1|4}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
:$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land p} \implies q$
{{BeginTableau|\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land p} \implies q}} {{Assumption|1|\paren {p \implies q} \land p}} {{Simplification|2|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{Simplification|3|1|p|1|2}} {{ModusPonens|4|1|q|2|3}} {{Implication|5||\paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land p} \implies q|1|4}} {{EndTableau}} {{Qed}}
Modus Ponendo Ponens/Variant 3/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Modus_Ponendo_Ponens/Variant_3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Modus_Ponendo_Ponens/Variant_3/Proof_1
[ "Modus Ponendo Ponens" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7375
Modus Ponendo Ponens/Variant 3
:$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land p} \implies q$
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connective are true for all boolean interpretations. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|ccccc|c|c|} \hline ((p & \implies & q) & \land & p) & \implies & q \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \F & \F & \T & \F \\ \F & \T & \T & \F & \F & \T & ...
:$\vdash \paren {\paren {p \implies q} \land p} \implies q$
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]] are [[Definition:True|true]] for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]. :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{...
Modus Ponendo Ponens/Variant 3/Proof by Truth Table
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Modus_Ponendo_Ponens/Variant_3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Modus_Ponendo_Ponens/Variant_3/Proof_by_Truth_Table
[ "Modus Ponendo Ponens" ]
[]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:True", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-7376
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1/Proof 1
:$p \iff q \dashv \vdash \paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q \vdash \paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{BiconditionalElimination|2|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{BiconditionalElimination|3|1|q \implies p|1|2}} {{Conjunction|4|1|\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p}|2|3}} {{EndTableau}} {{BeginTableau|\paren {p...
:$p \iff q \dashv \vdash \paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p}$
{{BeginTableau|p \iff q \vdash \paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p} }} {{Premise|1|p \iff q}} {{BiconditionalElimination|2|1|p \implies q|1|1}} {{BiconditionalElimination|3|1|q \implies p|1|2}} {{Conjunction|4|1|\paren {p \implies q} \land \paren {q \implies p}|2|3}} {{EndTableau}} {{BeginTableau|\paren ...
Rule of Material Equivalence/Formulation 1/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_1/Proof_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rule_of_Material_Equivalence/Formulation_1/Proof_1
[ "Rule of Material Equivalence" ]
[]
[]
proofwiki-7377
Order-Convex Set Characterization
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be an ordered set. Let $C \subseteq S$. {{TFAE}} {{begin-axiom}} {{axiom | n = 1 | t = $C$ is order-convex. }} {{axiom | n = 2 | t = $C$ is the intersection of an upper section with a lower section. }} {{axiom | n = 3 | t = $C$ is the intersection of its upper cl...
=== $(2)$ implies $(1)$ === Follows from Upper Section is Order-Convex, Lower Section is Order-Convex, and Intersection of Order-Convex Sets is Order-Convex. {{qed|lemma}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $C \subseteq S$. {{TFAE}} {{begin-axiom}} {{axiom | n = 1 | t = $C$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]]. }} {{axiom | n = 2 | t = $C$ is the intersection of an [[Definition:Upper Section|upper section]] wit...
=== $(2)$ implies $(1)$ === Follows from [[Upper Section is Order-Convex]], [[Lower Section is Order-Convex]], and [[Intersection of Order-Convex Sets is Order-Convex]]. {{qed|lemma}}
Order-Convex Set Characterization
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Order-Convex_Set_Characterization
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Order-Convex_Set_Characterization
[ "Order-Convex Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Upper Section", "Definition:Lower Section" ]
[ "Upper Section is Order-Convex", "Lower Section is Order-Convex", "Intersection of Order-Convex Sets is Order-Convex" ]
proofwiki-7378
Upper Closure is Upper Section
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $T$ be a subset of $S$. Let $U$ be the upper closure of $T$. Then $U$ is an upper section.
Let $a \in U$. Let $b \in S$ with $a \preceq b$. By the definition of upper closure, there is a $t \in T$ such that $t \preceq a$. By transitivity, $t \preceq b$. Thus, again by the definition of upper closure: :$b \in U$ Since this holds for all such $a$ and $b$, $U$ is an upper section. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $T$ be a [[Definition:subset|subset]] of $S$. Let $U$ be the [[Definition:Upper Closure of Subset|upper closure]] of $T$. Then $U$ is an [[Definition:Upper Section|upper section]].
Let $a \in U$. Let $b \in S$ with $a \preceq b$. By the definition of [[Definition:Upper Closure of Subset|upper closure]], there is a $t \in T$ such that $t \preceq a$. By [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitivity]], $t \preceq b$. Thus, again by the definition of [[Definition:Upper Closure of Subset|upper clo...
Upper Closure is Upper Section
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_Closure_is_Upper_Section
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_Closure_is_Upper_Section
[ "Upper Sections", "Upper Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:subset", "Definition:Upper Closure/Set", "Definition:Upper Section" ]
[ "Definition:Upper Closure/Set", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Upper Closure/Set", "Definition:Upper Section" ]
proofwiki-7379
Open Ray is Open in GO-Space/Definition 1
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be a generalized ordered space. Let $p \in S$. Then: :$p^\prec$ and $p^\succ$ are $\tau$-open where: :$p^\prec$ is the strict lower closure of $p$ :$p^\succ$ is the strict upper closure of $p$.
We will prove that $U = p^\succ$ is $\tau$-open. That $p^\prec$ is $\tau$-open will follow by duality. Let $u \in U$. Since $p \notin U$, $p \ne u$. By definition of GO-space, $\tau$ is Hausdorff. From $T_2$ Space is $T_1$ Space, $\tau$ is $T_1$. Thus by definition of GO-space, there is an open, order-convex set $M$ su...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space|generalized ordered space]]. Let $p \in S$. Then: :$p^\prec$ and $p^\succ$ are [[Definition:Open Set (Topology)|$\tau$-open]] where: :$p^\prec$ is the [[Definition:Strict Lower Closure of Element|strict lower closure]] of $p$ :$p^\succ$ is...
We will prove that $U = p^\succ$ is [[Definition:Open Set (Topology)|$\tau$-open]]. That $p^\prec$ is [[Definition:Open Set (Topology)|$\tau$-open]] will follow by duality. Let $u \in U$. Since $p \notin U$, $p \ne u$. By definition of [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space|GO-space]], $\tau$ is [[Definition:Hausdo...
Open Ray is Open in GO-Space/Definition 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Open_Ray_is_Open_in_GO-Space/Definition_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Open_Ray_is_Open_in_GO-Space/Definition_1
[ "Generalized Ordered Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space", "Definition:Open Set/Topology", "Definition:Strict Lower Closure/Element", "Definition:Strict Upper Closure/Element" ]
[ "Definition:Open Set/Topology", "Definition:Open Set/Topology", "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space", "Definition:T2 Space", "T2 Space is T1", "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Set is Open iff Neighborhood of all its Points" ]
proofwiki-7380
Upper and Lower Closures of Open Set in GO-Space are Open
Let $\struct {X, \preceq, \tau}$ be a Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1. Let $A$ be open in $X$. Then the upper and lower closures of $A$ are open.
We will show that the upper closure $U$ of $A$ is open. The lower closure can be proven open by the same method. By the definition of upper closure: :$U = \set {u \in X: \exists a \in A: a \preceq u}$ But then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = U | r = \set {u \in X: \paren {u \in A} \lor \paren {\exists a \in A: a \prec...
Let $\struct {X, \preceq, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1|Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1]]. Let $A$ be open in $X$. Then the upper and lower closures of $A$ are open.
We will show that the upper closure $U$ of $A$ is open. The lower closure can be proven open by the same method. By the definition of upper closure: :$U = \set {u \in X: \exists a \in A: a \preceq u}$ But then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = U | r = \set {u \in X: \paren {u \in A} \lor \paren {\exists a \in A: a \p...
Upper and Lower Closures of Open Set in GO-Space are Open
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_and_Lower_Closures_of_Open_Set_in_GO-Space_are_Open
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_and_Lower_Closures_of_Open_Set_in_GO-Space_are_Open
[ "Topology", "Total Orderings" ]
[ "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1" ]
[ "Definition:Upper Closure/Element", "Open Ray is Open in GO-Space/Definition 1", "Category:Topology", "Category:Total Orderings" ]
proofwiki-7381
Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1 implies Definition 3
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be a generalized ordered space by Definition 1: {{:Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1}} Then $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ is a generalized ordered space by Definition 3: {{:Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 3}}
Let $\BB$ be a basis for $\tau$ consisting of order-convex sets. Let: :$\SS = \set {U^\succeq: U \in \BB} \cup \set {U^\preceq: U \in \BB}$ where $U^\succeq$ and $U^\preceq$ denote the upper closure and lower closure respectively of $U$. By Upper Closure is Upper Section and Lower Closure is Lower Section, the elements...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1|generalized ordered space by Definition 1]]: {{:Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1}} Then $\struct {S, \preceq, \tau}$ is a [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 3|generalized ordered space by Definiti...
Let $\BB$ be a [[Definition:Basis (Topology)|basis]] for $\tau$ consisting of [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex sets]]. Let: :$\SS = \set {U^\succeq: U \in \BB} \cup \set {U^\preceq: U \in \BB}$ where $U^\succeq$ and $U^\preceq$ denote the [[Definition:Upper Closure of Subset|upper closure]] and [[Definition:...
Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1 implies Definition 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Generalized_Ordered_Space/Definition_1_implies_Definition_3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Generalized_Ordered_Space/Definition_1_implies_Definition_3
[ "Equivalence of Definitions of Generalized Ordered Space" ]
[ "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 1", "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 3" ]
[ "Definition:Basis (Topology)", "Definition:Order-Convex Set", "Definition:Upper Closure/Set", "Definition:Lower Closure/Set", "Upper Closure is Upper Section", "Lower Closure is Lower Section", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Upper Section", "Definition:Lower Section", "Definition:Sub-Basis", ...
proofwiki-7382
Upper Section is Order-Convex
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $T \subseteq S$ be an upper section. Then $T$ is order-convex in $S$.
Let $a, c \in T$. Let $b \in S$. Let $a \preceq b \preceq c$. Since: :$a \in T$ :$a \preceq b$ :$T$ is an upper section it follows that: :$b \in T$ This holds for all such $a$, $b$, and $c$. Therefore, by definition, $T$ is order-convex in $S$. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $T \subseteq S$ be an [[Definition:Upper Section|upper section]]. Then $T$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]] in $S$.
Let $a, c \in T$. Let $b \in S$. Let $a \preceq b \preceq c$. Since: :$a \in T$ :$a \preceq b$ :$T$ is an [[Definition:Upper Section|upper section]] it follows that: :$b \in T$ This holds for all such $a$, $b$, and $c$. Therefore, by definition, $T$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]] in $S$. {{qed}}
Upper Section is Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_Section_is_Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_Section_is_Order-Convex
[ "Upper Sections", "Order-Convex Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Upper Section", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
[ "Definition:Upper Section", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
proofwiki-7383
Lower Section is Order-Convex
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $T \subseteq S$ be a lower section. Then $T$ is order-convex in $S$.
Let $a, c \in T$. Let $b \in S$. Let $a \preceq b \preceq c$. Since: :$c \in T$ :$b \preceq c$ :$T$ is a lower section it follows that: :$b \in T$ This holds for all such $a$, $b$, and $c$. Hence, by definition, $T$ is order-convex in $S$. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $T \subseteq S$ be a [[Definition:Lower Section|lower section]]. Then $T$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-|convex]] in $S$.
Let $a, c \in T$. Let $b \in S$. Let $a \preceq b \preceq c$. Since: :$c \in T$ :$b \preceq c$ :$T$ is a [[Definition:Lower Section|lower section]] it follows that: :$b \in T$ This holds for all such $a$, $b$, and $c$. Hence, by definition, $T$ is [[Definition:Order-Convex Set|order-convex]] in $S$. {{qed}}
Lower Section is Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Lower_Section_is_Order-Convex
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Lower_Section_is_Order-Convex
[ "Lower Sections", "Order-Convex Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Lower Section", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
[ "Definition:Lower Section", "Definition:Order-Convex Set" ]
proofwiki-7384
GO-Space Embeds Densely into Linearly Ordered Space
Let $\struct {Y, \preceq, \tau}$ be a generalized ordered space (GO-space) by Definition 3. That is: :let $\struct {Y, \tau}$ be a Hausdorff space and: :let $\tau$ have a sub-basis consisting of upper sections and lower sections relative to $\preceq$. Then $\struct {Y, \preceq, \tau}$ is a GO-space by Definition 2. Tha...
<section notitle="True" name="proof"> Let $X$ be the disjoint union of $Y$ with the set of all lower sections $L$ in $Y$ such that $L$ and $Y \setminus L$ are open and nonempty and either: :$L$ has a maximum, and $Y\setminus L$ does not have a minimum, or :$Y \setminus L$ has a minimum, and $L$ does not have a maximum...
Let $\struct {Y, \preceq, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 3|generalized ordered space (GO-space) by Definition 3]]. That is: :let $\struct {Y, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Hausdorff Space|Hausdorff space]] and: :let $\tau$ have a [[Definition:Sub-Basis|sub-basis]] consisting of [[Definition:U...
<section notitle="True" name="proof"> Let $X$ be the disjoint union of $Y$ with the set of all [[Definition:Lower Section|lower sections]] $L$ in $Y$ such that $L$ and $Y \setminus L$ are open and nonempty and either: :$L$ has a maximum, and $Y\setminus L$ does not have a minimum, or :$Y \setminus L$ has a minimum, an...
GO-Space Embeds Densely into Linearly Ordered Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/GO-Space_Embeds_Densely_into_Linearly_Ordered_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/GO-Space_Embeds_Densely_into_Linearly_Ordered_Space
[ "Generalized Ordered Spaces", "Linearly Ordered Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 3", "Definition:T2 Space", "Definition:Sub-Basis", "Definition:Upper Section", "Definition:Lower Section", "Definition:Generalized Ordered Space/Definition 2", "Definition:Linearly Ordered Space", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Order Embedding", ...
[ "Definition:Lower Section", "Definition:Lower Section", "Union of Total Ordering with Lower Sections is Total Ordering", "Restriction of Total Ordering is Total Ordering", "Definition:Total Ordering", "Definition:Order Embedding", "Definition:Order Topology", "Definition:Lower Section", "Definition:...
proofwiki-7385
Upper Section with no Minimal Element
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $U \subseteq S$. Then: :$U$ is an upper section in $S$ with no minimal element {{iff}}: :$\ds U = \bigcup \set {u^\succ: u \in U}$ where $u^\succ$ is the strict upper closure of $u$.
=== Forward implication === Let $U$ be an upper section in $S$ with no minimal element. Then by the definition of upper section: :$\ds \bigcup \set {u^\succ: u \in U} \subseteq U$ Let $x \in U$. Since $U$ has no minimal element, $x$ is not minimal. Thus there is a $u \in U$ such that $u \prec x$. Then $x \in u^\succ$, ...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $U \subseteq S$. Then: :$U$ is an [[Definition:Upper Section|upper section]] in $S$ with no [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal element]] {{iff}}: :$\ds U = \bigcup \set {u^\succ: u \in U}$ where $u^\succ$ is the [[Definition:Strict Upper ...
=== Forward implication === Let $U$ be an [[Definition:Upper Section|upper section]] in $S$ with no [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal element]]. Then by the definition of [[Definition:Upper Section|upper section]]: :$\ds \bigcup \set {u^\succ: u \in U} \subseteq U$ Let $x \in U$. Since $U$ has no [[Definition:Mi...
Upper Section with no Minimal Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_Section_with_no_Minimal_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Upper_Section_with_no_Minimal_Element
[ "Upper Sections" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Upper Section", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Strict Upper Closure/Element" ]
[ "Definition:Upper Section", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Upper Section", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Set Equality/Definition 2", "Definition:Upper Section", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element" ]
proofwiki-7386
Lower Sections in Totally Ordered Set form Chain
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a totally ordered set. Let $\LL$ be a set of lower sections in $S$. Then $\LL$ is a chain. That is, $\LL$ is totally ordered by $\subseteq$.
Let $L, M \in \LL$. Suppose that $M \nsubseteq L$. Then: :$\exists x \in M: x \notin L$ Let $y \in L$. Then since $\preceq$ is a total ordering, $x \preceq y$ or $y \preceq x$. If $x \preceq y$, then since $L$ is a lower section: $x \in L$, a contradiction. Thus $y \preceq x$. Since $M$ is a lower section, $y \in M$. S...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Totally Ordered Set|totally ordered set]]. Let $\LL$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Lower Section|lower sections]] in $S$. Then $\LL$ is a [[Definition:Chain of Sets|chain]]. That is, $\LL$ is [[Definition:Totally Ordered Set|totally ordered]] by $\subseteq$...
Let $L, M \in \LL$. Suppose that $M \nsubseteq L$. Then: :$\exists x \in M: x \notin L$ Let $y \in L$. Then since $\preceq$ is a [[Definition:Total Ordering|total ordering]], $x \preceq y$ or $y \preceq x$. If $x \preceq y$, then since $L$ is a [[Definition:Lower Section|lower section]]: $x \in L$, a contradicti...
Lower Sections in Totally Ordered Set form Chain
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Lower_Sections_in_Totally_Ordered_Set_form_Chain
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Lower_Sections_in_Totally_Ordered_Set_form_Chain
[ "Lower Sections", "Total Orderings", "Chains (Order Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Totally Ordered Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Lower Section", "Definition:Chain (Order Theory)/Subset Relation", "Definition:Totally Ordered Set" ]
[ "Definition:Total Ordering", "Definition:Lower Section", "Definition:Lower Section", "Definition:Chain (Order Theory)/Subset Relation", "Category:Lower Sections", "Category:Total Orderings", "Category:Chains (Order Theory)" ]
proofwiki-7387
Exclusive Or is Self-Inverse
:$\paren {p \oplus q} \oplus q \dashv \vdash p$ where $\oplus$ denotes the exclusive or operator.
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connective on the {{LHS}} match those for $p$ on the {{RHS}} for all boolean interpretations: $\begin{array}{|ccccc||c|} \hline (p & \oplus & q) & \oplus & q & p \\ \hline \F & \F & \F & \F & \F & \F \\ \F & \T & \T & \F ...
:$\paren {p \oplus q} \oplus q \dashv \vdash p$ where $\oplus$ denotes the [[Definition:Exclusive Or|exclusive or operator]].
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]] on the {{LHS}} match those for $p$ on the {{RHS}} for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]: $\b...
Exclusive Or is Self-Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exclusive_Or_is_Self-Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exclusive_Or_is_Self-Inverse
[ "Exclusive Or" ]
[ "Definition:Exclusive Or" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
proofwiki-7388
Conjunction has no Inverse
Let $\land$ denote the conjunction operation of propositional logic. Then there exists no binary logical connective $\circ$ such that: :$(1): \quad \forall p, q \in \set {T, F}: \left({p \land q}\right) \circ q = p$
This will be proven by contradiction. Let such an operation $\circ$ exist. Let $f^\circ: \mathbb B^2 \to \mathbb B$ be the associated truth function. Suppose now that $q = F$, while $p$ remains unspecified. Then: :$p \land q = \map {f^\land} {p, F} = F$ where $f^\land$ is the truth function of conjunction. It does not ...
Let $\land$ denote the [[Definition:Conjunction|conjunction operation]] of [[Definition:Propositional Logic|propositional logic]]. Then there exists no [[Definition:Binary Logical Connective|binary logical connective]] $\circ$ such that: :$(1): \quad \forall p, q \in \set {T, F}: \left({p \land q}\right) \circ q = p...
This will be [[Proof by Contradiction|proven by contradiction]]. Let such an operation $\circ$ exist. Let $f^\circ: \mathbb B^2 \to \mathbb B$ be the associated [[Definition:Truth Function|truth function]]. Suppose now that $q = F$, while $p$ remains unspecified. Then: :$p \land q = \map {f^\land} {p, F} = F$ wh...
Conjunction has no Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_has_no_Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Conjunction_has_no_Inverse
[ "Conjunction" ]
[ "Definition:Conjunction", "Definition:Propositional Logic", "Definition:Logical Connective/Binary" ]
[ "Proof by Contradiction", "Definition:Truth Function", "Definition:Truth Function", "Definition:Conjunction", "Category:Conjunction" ]
proofwiki-7389
Disjunction has no Inverse
Let $\lor$ denote the disjunction operation of propositional logic. Then there exists no binary logical connective $\circ$ such that: :$(1): \quad \forall p, q \in \left\{{T, F}\right\}: \left({p \lor q}\right) \circ q = p$
Let $q$ be true. Then $p \lor q = T$, whatever truth value $p$ holds. In this case $(1)$ simplifies to: :$(2): \quad \forall p \in \left\{{T, F}\right\}: T \circ T = p$ Either $T \circ T = T$ or $T \circ T = F$, but not both. If $p = F$, then it must be that $T \circ T = F$. If $p = T$, then it must be that $T \circ T ...
Let $\lor$ denote the [[Definition:Disjunction|disjunction operation]] of [[Definition:Propositional Logic|propositional logic]]. Then there exists no [[Definition:Binary Logical Connective|binary logical connective]] $\circ$ such that: :$(1): \quad \forall p, q \in \left\{{T, F}\right\}: \left({p \lor q}\right) \ci...
Let $q$ be [[Definition:True|true]]. Then $p \lor q = T$, whatever [[Definition:Truth Value|truth value]] $p$ holds. In this case $(1)$ simplifies to: :$(2): \quad \forall p \in \left\{{T, F}\right\}: T \circ T = p$ Either $T \circ T = T$ or $T \circ T = F$, but not both. If $p = F$, then it must be that $T \circ T...
Disjunction has no Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_has_no_Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Disjunction_has_no_Inverse
[ "Disjunction" ]
[ "Definition:Disjunction", "Definition:Propositional Logic", "Definition:Logical Connective/Binary" ]
[ "Definition:True", "Definition:Truth Value", "Category:Disjunction" ]
proofwiki-7390
Binary Logical Connectives with Inverse
Let $\circ$ be a binary logical connective. Then there exists another binary logical connective $*$ such that: :$\forall p, q \in \set {\F, \T}: \paren {p \circ q} * q \dashv \vdash p \dashv \vdash q * \paren {p \circ q}$ {{iff}} $\circ$ is either: :$(1): \quad$ the exclusive or operator or: :$(2): \quad$ the biconditi...
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\circ$ be a binary logical connective such that there exists $*$ such that: :$\paren {p \circ q} * q \dashv \vdash p$ That is, by definition (and minor abuse of notation): :$\forall p, q \in \set {\F, \T}: \paren {p \circ q} * q = p$ For reference purposes, let us list from Binary Truth...
Let $\circ$ be a [[Definition:Binary Logical Connective|binary logical connective]]. Then there exists another [[Definition:Binary Logical Connective|binary logical connective]] $*$ such that: :$\forall p, q \in \set {\F, \T}: \paren {p \circ q} * q \dashv \vdash p \dashv \vdash q * \paren {p \circ q}$ {{iff}} $\circ$...
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\circ$ be a [[Definition:Binary Logical Connective|binary logical connective]] such that there exists $*$ such that: :$\paren {p \circ q} * q \dashv \vdash p$ That is, by definition (and minor abuse of notation): :$\forall p, q \in \set {\F, \T}: \paren {p \circ q} * q = p$ For refe...
Binary Logical Connectives with Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Binary_Logical_Connectives_with_Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Binary_Logical_Connectives_with_Inverse
[ "Exclusive Or", "Biconditional", "Propositional Logic" ]
[ "Definition:Logical Connective/Binary", "Definition:Logical Connective/Binary", "Definition:Exclusive Or", "Definition:Biconditional", "Definition:Truth Function", "Definition:Inverse Operation", "Definition:Exclusive Or", "Definition:Biconditional" ]
[ "Definition:Logical Connective/Binary", "Binary Truth Functions", "Definition:Logical Connective/Binary", "Definition:Inverse Operation", "Definition:Logical Connective/Binary", "Definition:Inverse Operation", "Definition:Exclusive Or", "Definition:Biconditional", "Exclusive Or is Self-Inverse", "...
proofwiki-7391
Biconditional is Self-Inverse
:$\paren {p \iff q} \iff q \dashv \vdash p$ where $\iff$ denotes the biconditional operator.
We apply the Method of Truth Tables. As can be seen by inspection, the truth values under the main connective on the {{LHS}} match those for $p$ on the {{RHS}} for all boolean interpretations: :<nowiki>$\begin{array}{|ccccc||c|} \hline (p & \iff & q) & \iff & q & p \\ \hline \F & \T & \F & \F & \F & \F \\ \F & \F & \T ...
:$\paren {p \iff q} \iff q \dashv \vdash p$ where $\iff$ denotes the [[Definition:Biconditional|biconditional operator]].
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]] on the {{LHS}} match those for $p$ on the {{RHS}} for all [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretations]]: :<n...
Biconditional is Self-Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Self-Inverse
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Biconditional_is_Self-Inverse
[ "Biconditional", "Truth Table Proofs" ]
[ "Definition:Biconditional" ]
[ "Method of Truth Tables", "Definition:Truth Value", "Definition:Main Connective/Propositional Logic", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Category:Biconditional", "Category:Truth Table Proofs" ]
proofwiki-7392
Finite Chain is Order-Isomorphic to Finite Ordinal
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an ordered set. Let $C$ be a finite chain in $S$. Then for some finite ordinal $\mathbf n$: :$\struct {C, {\preceq \restriction_C} }$ is order-isomorphic to $\mathbf n$. That is: :$\struct {C, {\preceq \restriction_C} }$ is order-isomorphic to $\N_n$ where $\N_n$ is the initial segment of ...
By the definition of finite set: :there exists an $n \in \N$ such that there exists a bijection $f: C \to \N_n$. This $n$ is unique by Equality of Natural Numbers and Set Equivalence behaves like Equivalence Relation. Define a mapping $g: \N_n \to C$ recursively as: :$\map g 0 = \min C$ :$\map g {k + 1} = \map \min {C ...
Let $\struct {S, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Set|ordered set]]. Let $C$ be a [[Definition:Finite Set|finite]] [[Definition:Chain (Order Theory)|chain]] in $S$. Then for some finite [[Definition:Ordinal|ordinal]] $\mathbf n$: :$\struct {C, {\preceq \restriction_C} }$ is [[Definition:Order Isomorphism|order-i...
By the definition of [[Definition:Finite Set|finite set]]: :there exists an $n \in \N$ such that there exists a [[Definition:Bijection|bijection]] $f: C \to \N_n$. This $n$ is [[Definition:Unique|unique]] by [[Equality of Natural Numbers]] and [[Set Equivalence behaves like Equivalence Relation]]. Define a [[Definit...
Finite Chain is Order-Isomorphic to Finite Ordinal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finite_Chain_is_Order-Isomorphic_to_Finite_Ordinal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finite_Chain_is_Order-Isomorphic_to_Finite_Ordinal
[ "Total Orderings", "Ordinals", "Chains (Order Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Set", "Definition:Finite Set", "Definition:Chain (Order Theory)", "Definition:Ordinal", "Definition:Order Isomorphism", "Definition:Order Isomorphism", "Definition:Initial Segment of Natural Numbers/Zero-Based" ]
[ "Definition:Finite Set", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Unique", "Equality of Natural Numbers", "Set Equivalence behaves like Equivalence Relation", "Definition:Mapping", "Principle of Recursive Definition" ]
proofwiki-7393
Complete Linearly Ordered Space is Compact
Let $\struct {X, \preceq, \tau}$ be a linearly ordered space. Let $\struct {X, \preceq}$ be a complete lattice. Then $\struct {X, \tau}$ is compact.
By Space is Compact iff exists Basis such that Every Cover has Finite Subcover, it is sufficient to prove that an open cover of $X$ consisting of open intervals and rays has a finite subcover. Let $\AA$ be an open cover of $X$ consisting of open rays and open intervals. Let $m = \inf X$. This infimum exists because $\s...
Let $\struct {X, \preceq, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Linearly Ordered Space|linearly ordered space]]. Let $\struct {X, \preceq}$ be a [[Definition:Complete Lattice|complete lattice]]. Then $\struct {X, \tau}$ is [[Definition:Compact Topological Space|compact]].
By [[Space is Compact iff exists Basis such that Every Cover has Finite Subcover]], it is sufficient to prove that an open cover of $X$ consisting of open intervals and rays has a finite subcover. Let $\AA$ be an open cover of $X$ consisting of open rays and open intervals. Let $m = \inf X$. This infimum exists beca...
Complete Linearly Ordered Space is Compact
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complete_Linearly_Ordered_Space_is_Compact
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complete_Linearly_Ordered_Space_is_Compact
[ "Linearly Ordered Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Linearly Ordered Space", "Definition:Complete Lattice", "Definition:Compact Topological Space" ]
[ "Space is Compact iff Every Cover from Basis has Finite Subcover" ]
proofwiki-7394
Infinite Sequence Property of Well-Founded Relation/Reverse Implication
Let $\struct {S, \RR}$ be a relational structure. Let $\RR$ be such that there exists no infinite sequence $\sequence {a_n}$ of elements of $S$ such that: :$\forall n \in \N: \paren {a_{n + 1} \mathrel \RR a_n} \text { and } \paren {a_{n + 1} \ne a_n}$ Then $\RR$ is a well-founded relation.
Suppose $\RR$ is not a well-founded relation. So by definition there exists a non-empty subset $T$ of $S$ which has no minimal element. Let $a \in T$. Since $a$ is not minimal in $T$, we can find $b \in T: \paren {b \mathrel \RR a} \text { and } \paren {b \ne a}$. This holds for all $a \in T$. Hence the restriction $\R...
Let $\struct {S, \RR}$ be a [[Definition:Relational Structure|relational structure]]. Let $\RR$ be such that there exists no [[Definition:Infinite Sequence|infinite sequence]] $\sequence {a_n}$ of [[Definition:Element|elements]] of $S$ such that: :$\forall n \in \N: \paren {a_{n + 1} \mathrel \RR a_n} \text { and } \p...
Suppose $\RR$ is not a [[Definition:Well-Founded Relation|well-founded relation]]. So by definition there exists a [[Definition:Non-Empty Set|non-empty]] [[Definition:Subset|subset]] $T$ of $S$ which has no [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal element]]. Let $a \in T$. Since $a$ is not [[Definition:Minimal Element|m...
Infinite Sequence Property of Well-Founded Relation/Reverse Implication/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infinite_Sequence_Property_of_Well-Founded_Relation/Reverse_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infinite_Sequence_Property_of_Well-Founded_Relation/Reverse_Implication/Proof_1
[ "Infinite Sequence Property of Well-Founded Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Relational Structure", "Definition:Sequence/Infinite Sequence", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Well-Founded Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Well-Founded Relation", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Restriction/Relation", "Definition:Right-Total Relation", "Definition:Endorelation", "Axiom:Axiom of Dependent Choice/Right-Total", "Definiti...
proofwiki-7395
Infinite Sequence Property of Well-Founded Relation/Reverse Implication
Let $\struct {S, \RR}$ be a relational structure. Let $\RR$ be such that there exists no infinite sequence $\sequence {a_n}$ of elements of $S$ such that: :$\forall n \in \N: \paren {a_{n + 1} \mathrel \RR a_n} \text { and } \paren {a_{n + 1} \ne a_n}$ Then $\RR$ is a well-founded relation.
Suppose $\RR$ is not a well-founded relation. Hence there exists $T \subseteq S$ such that $T$ has no minimal element under $\RR$. Let $a_0 \in T$. We have that $a_0$ is not minimal in $T$. So: :$\exists a_1 \in T: \paren {a_1 \mathrel \RR a_0} \text { and } a_1 \ne a_0$ Similarly, $a_1$ is not minimal in $T$. So: :$\e...
Let $\struct {S, \RR}$ be a [[Definition:Relational Structure|relational structure]]. Let $\RR$ be such that there exists no [[Definition:Infinite Sequence|infinite sequence]] $\sequence {a_n}$ of [[Definition:Element|elements]] of $S$ such that: :$\forall n \in \N: \paren {a_{n + 1} \mathrel \RR a_n} \text { and } \p...
Suppose $\RR$ is not a [[Definition:Well-Founded Relation|well-founded relation]]. Hence there exists $T \subseteq S$ such that $T$ has no [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal element]] under $\RR$. Let $a_0 \in T$. We have that $a_0$ is not [[Definition:Minimal Element|minimal]] in $T$. So: :$\exists a_1 \in T: \...
Infinite Sequence Property of Well-Founded Relation/Reverse Implication/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infinite_Sequence_Property_of_Well-Founded_Relation/Reverse_Implication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infinite_Sequence_Property_of_Well-Founded_Relation/Reverse_Implication/Proof_2
[ "Infinite Sequence Property of Well-Founded Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Relational Structure", "Definition:Sequence/Infinite Sequence", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Well-Founded Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Well-Founded Relation", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Axiom:Axiom of Dependent Choice/Right-Total", "Definition:Minimal/Element", "Definition:Right-Total Relation", "Axiom:Axiom of Dependent Choice/Right-Total", "Definition:Seq...
proofwiki-7396
Inversion Mapping on Ordered Group is Dual Order-Isomorphism
Let $\struct {G, \circ, \preceq}$ be an ordered group. Let $\iota: G \to G$ be the inversion mapping, defined by $\map \phi x = x^{-1}$. Then $\iota$ is a dual order-isomorphism.
By Inversion Mapping is Involution and Involution is Permutation, $\iota$ is a permutation and so by definition bijective. Let $x, y \in G$ such that $x \prec y$. Then $y^{-1} \prec x^{-1}$ by Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group. Thus $\map \iota y \prec \map \iota x$. Since this holds for all $x$ and ...
Let $\struct {G, \circ, \preceq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Group|ordered group]]. Let $\iota: G \to G$ be the [[Definition:Inversion Mapping|inversion mapping]], defined by $\map \phi x = x^{-1}$. Then $\iota$ is a [[Definition:Dual Isomorphism (Order Theory)|dual order-isomorphism]].
By [[Inversion Mapping is Involution]] and [[Involution is Permutation]], $\iota$ is a [[Definition:Permutation|permutation]] and so by definition [[Definition:Bijection|bijective]]. Let $x, y \in G$ such that $x \prec y$. Then $y^{-1} \prec x^{-1}$ by [[Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group]]. Thus $...
Inversion Mapping on Ordered Group is Dual Order-Isomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_on_Ordered_Group_is_Dual_Order-Isomorphism
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_on_Ordered_Group_is_Dual_Order-Isomorphism
[ "Ordered Groups", "Inversion Mappings" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Inversion Mapping", "Definition:Dual Isomorphism (Order Theory)" ]
[ "Inversion Mapping is Involution", "Involution is Permutation", "Definition:Permutation", "Definition:Bijection", "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group", "Definition:Strictly Decreasing/Mapping", "Inverse of Group Inverse", "Definition:Dual Isomorphism (Order Theory)", "Category:Orde...
proofwiki-7397
Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible/Corollary/Proof 1
Let $\struct {G, \circ, \preccurlyeq}$ be an ordered group with identity $e$. Let $\prec$ be the reflexive reduction of $\preceq$. Let $x, y \in G$. Then the following equivalences hold: {{:Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible/Corollary}}
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...
Let $\struct {G, \circ, \preccurlyeq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Group|ordered group]] with [[Definition:Identity Element|identity]] $e$. Let $\prec$ be the [[Definition:Reflexive Reduction|reflexive reduction]] of $\preceq$. Let $x, y \in G$. Then the following equivalences hold: {{:Ordering Compatible with Group...
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/Corollary/Proof_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible/Corollary/Proof_1
[ "Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Reflexive Reduction" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation", "Reflexive Reduction of Relation Compatible with Group Operation is Compatible", "Definition:Relation Compatible with Operation" ]
proofwiki-7398
Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible/Corollary/Proof 2
Let $\struct {G, \circ, \preccurlyeq}$ be an ordered group with identity $e$. Let $\prec$ be the reflexive reduction of $\preccurlyeq$. Let $x, y \in G$. Then the following equivalences hold: {{:Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible/Corollary}}
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}...
Let $\struct {G, \circ, \preccurlyeq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Group|ordered group]] with [[Definition:Identity Element|identity]] $e$. Let $\prec$ be the [[Definition:Reflexive Reduction|reflexive reduction]] of $\preccurlyeq$. Let $x, y \in G$. Then the following equivalences hold: {{:Ordering Compatible with ...
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/Corollary/Proof_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_Compatible_with_Group_Operation_is_Strongly_Compatible/Corollary/Proof_2
[ "Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity", "Definition:Reflexive Reduction" ]
[ "Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible", "Ordering Compatible with Group Operation is Strongly Compatible" ]
proofwiki-7399
Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group/Corollary/Proof 1
Let $\struct {G, \circ, \preccurlyeq}$ be an ordered group with identity $e$. Let $x \in G$. Then the following equivalences hold: {{:Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group/Corollary}}
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 ...
Let $\struct {G, \circ, \preccurlyeq}$ be an [[Definition:Ordered Group|ordered group]] with [[Definition:Identity Element|identity]] $e$. Let $x \in G$. Then the following equivalences hold: {{:Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group/Corollary}}
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/Proof_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inversion_Mapping_Reverses_Ordering_in_Ordered_Group/Corollary/Proof_1
[ "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Group", "Definition:Identity (Abstract Algebra)/Two-Sided Identity" ]
[ "Inversion Mapping Reverses Ordering in Ordered Group" ]