Jump to content

Proof using WOP

Featured Replies

Hello everyone,

 

I want to prove that for postive integers x, y, y is not equal to x+y. I want to do this using the WOP. Here's what I have done so far:

 

Suppose for some postive integer x, there exists a y st y y+x. By the WOP, there exists a smallest x0 st y=x0+y. Now I think I may have to apply the WOP again, but am not sure. Any advice?

 

Thanks a lot,


Kevin

 

P.S. A little help using special BBC code. I'd like to use LaTex but when I try to do the not equal sign it shows up as:

 

[latex]\ne
[/latex]

 

How do I get rid of the < br > ?

Edited by kmerfeld

  • Author

[latex]\ne[/latex]

 

There she goes. Thanks

Edited by kmerfeld

Hello everyone,

 

I want to prove that for postive integers x, y, y is not equal to x+y. I want to do this using the WOP. Here's what I have done so far:

 

Suppose for some postive integer x, there exists a y st y y+x. By the WOP, there exists a smallest x0 st y=x0+y. Now I think I may have to apply the WOP again, but am not sure. Any advice?

Apply the WOP to [latex]y[/latex], not [latex]x[/latex]. First, however, show that there does not eixst any positive integer [latex]x[/latex] such that [latex]1=1+x[/latex]. For this you can make use of the axiom that 1 is not the successor element of any positive integer.

  • Author

Hello Nehushtan,

 

Thanks for the suggestion. However, the book requires that I first apply the WOP on x. Then it "hints" that I should apply the WOP again...

 

KM

  • Author

I think I figured it out:

 

I want to show [latex]y \ne x+y [/latex] for all positive integers x and y.

 

So suppose there exists a y such that [latex]y=x+y[/latex]

 

Then by WOP, there exists a smallest x such that:

 

[latex]y=x_{0} +y[/latex]

 

Again by WOP, there exists a smallest y such that:

 

[latex]y_{0}=x_{0}+y_{0}[/latex]

 

Then:

 

[latex]y_{0}-y_{0}=x_{0}[/latex]

 

 

[latex]0=x_{0}[/latex]

 

But 0 is not a positive number. So this is a contradiction, meaning:

 

 

[latex]y \ne x+y [/latex] for all positive integers x and y.

 

Now it does seem like I could have done this proof without using WOP, but it still seems to work this way, and this is how I was asked to do it.

 

Thanks everyone. Consider question this solved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.