Discrete math - simple formalism question

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around formalizing statements in discrete mathematics, specifically regarding the existence of rational numbers between real numbers and the relationship between certain real numbers and their squares.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to formalize two mathematical statements and questions the necessity of an implication arrow in their solution. Participants discuss the logical connections and phrasing of the statements.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the formalization of the statements, with some guidance provided regarding the use of logical implications. The second statement's formalization appears to be accepted, though there is a suggestion to clarify terminology.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses uncertainty about discrete math terminology in English, indicating a potential barrier in understanding the formalization process.

oferon
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
I never used discrete math terms in english before, so I hope it sounds clear enough:

Formalize the following:
1) Between every two different real numbers there is a rational number
2) There exist real numbers x and y, such that x is smaller than y, yet x^2 is bigger than y^2

Now the solution I wrote for 1 is:

\forall x,y \in R.x\neq y \hspace{5 mm} \exists z\in Q.\left\langle[(x<z)\wedge (y>z)]\vee [(y<z)\wedge (x>z)]\right\rangleOnly then I checked the solution given by my teacher said:

\forall x,y \in R.x\neq y \Rightarrow \exists z\in Q.\left\langle[(x<z)\wedge (y>z)]\vee [(y<z)\wedge (x>z)]\right\rangle

Now, where did this implication arrow come from, and is it necessary? If so, what's wrong with my solution then?For the second sentence we didn't get any solution, so I just want to confirm the following is correct:

\exists x,y\in R.[(x<y)\wedge (x^2>y^2)]Thanks in advance for your time :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org


The 'implies' is there to emphasize the logical connection there. If you have two reals like that, then you can find such a z. Moreover, if you can't find such a z, then x=y (or one of x,y is not a real number, which seems less likely).
I probably would have left out the arrow as well, since the question is phrased as a statement, and not an implication. In any case, the sentence you wrote would usually be acceptable, but since your prof. wants the arrow in, leave it.

Your second answer looks fine to me, unless you want to put a little "s.t." in between there.
 
Hi gustav
Thanks for your reply
Could you just explain what "s.t." means? I'm not very familiar with the english terms.
Thanks a bunch
 
s.t. = 'such that'. "There exist x and y such that..." means there exist x and y having the following property.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
4K