Techniques of Proof III: Contradiction

CHAPTER 23
Techniques of proof III:
Contradiction
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted
whenever I am contradicted. Ralph Waldo Emerson, Journal entry, 8
November 1838
The law of the excluded middle asserts that a statement is true or it is false, it cannot be anything in
between. We can use this as another method of proof. We assume that the statement is false and proceed
logically to show that this gives a statement that we definitely know is false such as 1 = 0 or the Moon is
made of cheese. Thus our assumption must be wrong, the statement can’t be false – it leads to something
ridiculous – so the statement is true.
This method is called proof by contradiction. The name comes from the fact that assuming that the statement
is false is later contradicted by some other fact. It is also known by the name reductio ad absurdum
which when translated means reduction to the absurd.
Simple examples of proof by contradiction
The first example is just to show you the idea of proof by contradiction. The statement is easier to prove by
a direct method as we have seen in Theorem 20.1.
Example 23.1 Suppose that n is an odd integer. Then n2 is an odd integer.
Proof. Assume the contrary. That is, we suppose that n is an odd integer but that the conclusion is false,
i.e. n2 is an even integer.
2k + 1 for some k ∈ Z. Thus n2 = (2k + 1)2 = 4k + 2k + 1 which contradicts that n2 is even.
As n i s odd, n =
Thus our assumption that n2 is even must be wrong, i.e. n 2 must be odd. D
The statement above has the form A=⇒B. In general, if we assume such a statement is false, then we are
assuming that ‘A a nd not(B)’ as this is the negation of A=⇒B (see page 66). To use contradiction we then
have to show that ‘A and not(B)’ leads to something false.
The second example solves a harder problem.
161
162 CHAPTER 23 Techniques of proof III: Contradiction
Example 23.2 There are no positive integers x a nd y such that x2 − y2 = 1.
Proof. We assume the contrary, i.e. we assume that positive integers exist such that x2 − y2 = 1. Thus we have (x +
y) =
y)(x − 1. Since x a nd y a re integers, then x +
y a nd x − y a re integers too, so we have two cases:
Case 1: x + y = 1 and x−y =
1. Solving this pair of equations gives x = 1 and y = 0. This contradicts that x a nd y are
positive. This leaves the second case.
Case 2: x + y = −1 and x − y =
−1. Solving these we find that x = −1 and y = 0, again contradicting that the two
integers are positive. D
N(x2 −y2 = 1)’ . We assumed that the result was false, in other words,
As you can see, the statement was ‘ ∃x,y ∈
that its negation ‘∃x,y ∈ N(x2 − y2 = 1)’ is true.
Example 23.3
The sum of a rational and an irrational number is an irrational number.
We can see this better if we explicitly write the statement as an implication. In other words, ‘If x i s rational and y is
irrational, then x + y is irrational.’ Using the fact that ‘A=⇒B’ has negation ‘A and not(B)’ we assume that x i s
rational, y is irrational, and x + y is not irrational are all true.
Proof. Assume to the contrary, that is x i s rational, y is irrational and x + y is rational. Since x is rational x = p/q f or
some integers p a nd q. Similarly, x + y r ational implies that x + y = r/s for some integers r and s.
We see
r p + y =
r r − p rq − ps
x+ y = s =⇒ q s =⇒ y =
s q= ⇒ y =
. ps
rq −
sq But
∈ Q which contradicts that y i s irrational. Hence the statement is true. D
sq
Exercise 23.4
Consider the statement ‘The product of a rational and an irrational number is an irrational number.’ Prove this
statement or give a counterexample. If you give any counterexamples, can you change the statement slightly so that
you do have a true statement?
Example 23.5 The equation x7 + 3x3 + 5 has no rational roots.
Assume to the contrary that x is a root and is rational. Thus x = p/q where p a nd q are integers and this quotient is in
its simplest terms. (That is, we can’t divide top and bottom by the same number greater than 1.)
The irrationality of the square root of 2 163
Then we have (pq

)7
(
+ 3 pq
)3
+ 5 = 0
p7 + 3p3 q4 + 5q7 = 0.
We can consider what happens when p and q are odd and even. There are four cases to consider.
Case 1: If p a nd q a re both even, then p/q is not in its simplest form. Thus, we get a
contradiction. Case 2: If p andq are both odd, then the left-hand side ofp7 +3p3 q4 +5q7 = 0 is odd, while the right-hand
side is even. (Check this with an exercise from Chapter 20.) This is a contradiction. Case 3: If p is even and q i s odd,
then the left-hand side of the above equation is odd,
while the right is even. Again, this is a contradiction. Case 4: Ifp is odd andq is even, then, again, the left-hand side is
odd and the right-hand
side is even. A contradiction.
Thus, x i s not rational.
The irrationality of the square root of 2
Now √2 is we
an use
proof irrational The
negation of by contradiction to show a classic number. this
statement That
√
it that
is, is cannot 2 be is
theorem written as the rational.
We and proof of mathematics: quotient of two integers.
proceed to show that this assumption leads to an impossible statement.
Theorem 23.6
The square root of 2 is irrational, i.e. cannot be written in the form m/n where m and n are integers. Proof. Suppose
√
to the contrary that 2 = m/n where m and n are integers. Without loss of generality we can assume that this quotient
is in its simplest terms. Then we have,
n
√2 = m
2 =
(mn
)2 , by squaring both sides,

m2 2 2
2 = n 2n = m2 .
This implies that m2 is even since it is the product of 2 and n2 . We now have two choices for m: it can be even or it
can be odd. If m i s odd, then m2 is also odd, by Theorem 23.1. (Did you look back to check that the referenced
theorem gives this?) Hence we must have m e ven.
164 CHAPTER 23 Techniques of proof III: Contradiction
2k for some integer k. Then using the equation 2n2 = m2 we get
So, m =
2n2 = (2k)2
= 22 k2 = 4k2 n2 = 2k2 .
By reasoning similar to that above we conclude that n h as to be even as well, i.e. n = 2j f or some integer j.
However, we assumed that the quotient m/n was in its lowest form; this has been shown to be not the case:
2k = k . √
n = 2j j Thus we conclude that 2 cannot be written as a quotient of integers. D
√2 = m
√ √
Exercises 23.7 (i) Show that 3 is irrational. (ii) Show that 5 is irrational. (iii) Apply the proof to the
√
non-example ‘ 4 is irrational’. What happens? Where does
√
the proof go ‘wrong’ in this case. (iv) Can you generalize the method to p is irrational where p i s
a prime?
How to spot a proof by contradiction
We do not spot proofs by contradiction as such but automatically turn to the method if we cannot prove the
statement directly.
For example, to prove that something does not exist, we assume that it does and aim for a contradiction. And vice
versa.
The point is that it is difficult to do operations with something that does not exist. Assuming something exists
means we can apply operations. For example, to show something is irrational, it is easier to assume it is
rational because then we can write it in the form p/q for integers p and q.
How to write a proof by contradiction
(i) State that you are assuming the statement is false. Seasoned mathematicians will
recognize that the proof will be by contradiction. (ii) Write out what the statement being
false means using negation. (iii) Work out what this would imply until you find a
contradiction. (iv) Announce that a contradiction has been found.
Summary 165
Exercises
Exercises 23.8 (i) Show that the solutions of the equation x5 − 2x3 − 3 = 0 are all less than 2. (Hint:
It is easier to find roots less than 0 so change to a different variable.) (ii) Prove that for all integers x a nd y i f xy is
odd, then x and y are both odd. (iii) Prove by contradiction that there exists an infinite number of rational numbers
between 0 and 1. (Hint: Consider Theorem 20.4.) (iv) Show that proof by contradiction for P i s, logically speaking,
P is equivalent to (n ot P =⇒(Q and not Q)).
(v) Prove that there are no positive integer solutions to x2 + x + 1 = y2 . (vi) Prove that there is no greatest rational
√
number less than 2. (vii) For all rational numbers x and y with x<y prove that there exists an irrational
number z s uch that x<z<y. (viii) Prove the above but with x, y irrational and z rational. (ix) Give an example of a sum
√ √
of two irrational numbers that is rational. Is 2 + 3
rational or irrational? Explain. (x) Show that log2 3 is the number x such that
is irrational. (Hint: By definition, log2 3
√ √
2x = 3.) (xi) Prove or disprove: If x i s irrational, then x is irrational. (xii) Is 3 2 irrational or rational? Either way,
√
can you generalize your statement? (xiii) Suppose that x a nd y a re positive integers. Show that x2 + y2 = x + y.
Summary
▶ In proof by contradiction we assume that the negation of the statement is true and from
that deduce something that is obviously false. ▶ The square root of 2 is irrational. ▶ Write statements such as ‘The
sum of a rational and an irrational number is an irrational
number’ as implications.

Techniques of Proof III: Contradiction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Techniques of Proof III: Contradiction

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Techniques of Proof III: Contradiction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER 23