How Does Negation Work in Quantified Statements Involving Pigeons and Holes?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mathematicsresear
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the negation of quantified statements in the context of a problem involving pigeons and holes. Participants are examining the logical structure of statements that involve natural numbers and how to properly negate them.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the formal representation of the statement "At least one hole contains at least n+1 pigeons" and its negation. They question why the existential quantifier is applied to the first part of the statement but not to the second part regarding the number of pigeons.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided formal definitions and attempted to clarify the logical structure of the statements. There is ongoing confusion regarding the application of quantifiers, and multiple interpretations are being explored without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the implications of quantifiers in logical statements and the assumptions underlying their interpretations. The discussion is framed within the constraints of formal logic and natural numbers.

Mathematicsresear
Messages
66
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Why is the negation of: Atleast one hole contains atleast n+1 pigeons where n is a natural number

There are less than n+1 pigeons per hole?

Wouldn't it be: There are less than one hole that contains less than n+1 pigeons?

Wouldn't the negation of there exists a hole that contains atleast n+1 pigeons yield

all holes contain less than n+1 pigeons?

Why is the existential quantifier assumed for the phrase: "Atleast one hole" in the first part of the sentence but not for the "atleast n+1 pigeons"?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Mathematicsresear said:
Why is the negation of: At least one hole contains at least n+1 pigeons where n is a natural number
Let's make it formal and set ##N(L)## the number of pigeons in the hole ##L##.
Then the statement says: ##\exists L\, : \,|N(L)|\geq n+1##
which has the negation: ##\forall L \, : \,|N(L)| < n+1##
or in words
There are less than n+1 pigeons per hole?
 
fresh_42 said:
Let's make it formal and set ##N(L)## the number of pigeons in the hole ##L##.
Then the statement says: ##\exists L\, : \,|N(L)|\geq n+1##
which has the negation: ##\forall L \, : \,|N(L)| < n+1##
or in words
What about my other comments? because that's exactly what I'm confused about, why is atleast turned into an existential quantifier in the beginning of the sentence but not in the other part of the sentence?
 
Mathematicsresear said:
What about my other comments? because that's exactly what I'm confused about, why is at least turned into an existential quantifier in the beginning of the sentence but not in the other part of the sentence?
"At least one hole contains at least n+1 pigeons."

  • at least one hole = subject = exists, for otherwise we wouldn't talk about it; it specifies the subject we are talking about and which is not the empty set, i.e. it is necessary to exist = ##\exists\, L##
  • contains = predicate = announces a property, i.e. something can be said about the hole = ##":"##
  • at least n+1 pigeons = object = the something which can be said about the hole are the number of pigeons in it, i.e. the hole has n+1 pigeons = ##N(L)>n##

Thus we have ##\exists L\, \, : \, N(L) > n##

We can also say: ##\{\,L\,|\,N(L)>n\,\}\neq \emptyset## and then the negation is, that this set is empty. If the set is empty, then it's complement is the entire space, which are all holes in this case. So ##\{\,L\,|\,N(L)>n\,\}= \emptyset \Longrightarrow \{\,L\,|\,N(L)\leq n\,\} = \{\,L\,\}##

We can also say: ##\exists L\, : \,L \wedge N(L)>n## with the negation ##\forall L\, : \,\lnot L \vee N(L)\leq n##, which means, either it isn't a hole, or in case it is, there are at most ##n## pigeons in it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K