Proof That If 0 ≤ X < n, X Must Equal 0

  • Thread starter sedaw
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
In summary, the conversation discusses the need to prove that for any real positive number x and any real positive number n, if 0 <= x < n, then x must be equal to 0. The initial attempt at a solution is by contradiction, but the proof fails to show that there exists a positive number less than x. The suggestion is made to construct such a number, but the conversation ends with the conclusion that x must be equal to 0.
  • #1
sedaw
62
0
need to prove that if [tex]0\leq X<n[/tex]

and also 0<n so x=0.

The attempt at a solution

assume that x>0

[tex]\exists n, x\ni(0,\infty) |n< x [/tex]

contradiction !

for X<0 there's contradiction agin .

from here X have to be 0

is that right ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
x=1, n=2>0 satisfies [itex]0\leq x<n[/itex], yet x does not equal zero.
 
  • #3
Pere Callahan said:
x=1, n=2>0 satisfies [itex]0\leq x<n[/itex], yet x does not equal zero.

that is right but the porve is for each X so if there's only one case its enough .
 
  • #4
sedaw said:
that is right but the porve is for each X so if there's only one case its enough .

What are you trying to prove? I was under the impression that it is the following:
Whenever 0<=x<n for some positive (integer?) n, then x must be zero.
I gave a counter example that this is not always the case. As you said, one example is enough to show that the statement above is wrong.
 
  • #5
Pere Callahan said:
What are you trying to prove? I was under the impression that it is the following:
Whenever 0<=x<n for some positive (integer?) n, then x must be zero.
I gave a counter example that this is not always the case. As you said, one example is enough to show that the statement above is wrong.

not integer all the real num.

so what u suggest ?
 
  • #6
sedaw said:
not integer all the real num.

so what u suggest ?

My counterexample is still valid.
I suggest, you say what you are trying to prove and what you don't like about the counter example:smile:
 
  • #7
Pere Callahan said:
My counterexample is still valid.
I suggest, you say what you are trying to prove and what you don't like about the counter example:smile:

what`s not clear i need to prove that if x a real positive num and [tex]0\leq X<n[/tex]

for each real posiive uumber n so x=0 .
 
  • #8
sedaw said:
need to prove that if [tex]0\leq X<n[/tex]

and also 0<n so x=0.
This makes no sense. Do you mean you want to prove:
"if [itex]0\le x< n[/itex] for all real numbers n> 0, then x= 0"?

[/quote]The attempt at a solution

assume that x>0

[tex]\exists n, x\ni(0,\infty) |n< x [/tex]

contradiction !

for X<0 there's contradiction agin .

from here X have to be 0

is that right ?[/QUOTE]
 
  • #9
sedaw said:
not integer all the real num.

so what u suggest ?
I would suggest that you care enough about the problem to at least copy the problem correctly!

The proof you give is by contradiction:
Suppose x> 0 then there exist n> 0 such that x> n.

But you give no proof that the last statement "there exist n> 0 such that> n" is true itself!
You need to construct such a number. If x> 0 then what positive number is less than x?
 
  • #10
HallsofIvy said:
I would suggest that you care enough about the problem to at least copy the problem correctly!

The proof you give is by contradiction:
Suppose x> 0 then there exist n> 0 such that x> n.

But you give no proof that the last statement "there exist n> 0 such that> n" is true itself!
You need to construct such a number. If x> 0 then what positive number is less than x?


0<x<n

x=0.01
n=0.02

n = all the real numbers so that n might be 0.00000000000000000001

so x have to be 0
 

1. What does the statement "0 ≤ X < n" mean?

The statement means that X is greater than or equal to 0, and less than n. In other words, X is a positive number that is smaller than n.

2. Why does X have to equal 0 in this scenario?

If X is greater than or equal to 0, and less than n, then the only number that fits this criteria is 0. Any other number would either be less than 0 or greater than n, which would contradict the statement.

3. Can X be a negative number in this scenario?

No, X cannot be a negative number. The statement specifically states that X must be greater than or equal to 0, which means it cannot be a negative number.

4. How does this proof apply to real-life situations?

This proof is often used in mathematical equations and proofs, but it can also apply to real-life situations. For example, if you have a jar with a maximum capacity of n, and X represents the amount of liquid in the jar, then X must be 0 if the jar is empty (0 mL) and X cannot be greater than n (since the jar cannot hold more than n mL).

5. Can this statement be generalized to other numbers besides 0 and n?

Yes, this statement can be generalized to any two numbers, as long as the first number is smaller than the second number. For example, if the statement was "a ≤ X < b", then X could equal any number between a and b, but not equal to a or b.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
708
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
24
Views
789
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
251
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
687
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
659
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
983
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
779
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
530
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
704
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
592
Back
Top