How to Translate and Prove a Complex Predicate Logic Statement?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on translating a complex predicate logic statement involving positive real numbers and integers. The original statement asserts that for any positive real number x, there exists a positive real number y such that a specific inequality holds for all positive integers z. Participants express uncertainty about the correct translation of the statement into predicate logic, particularly regarding the placement of quantifiers and the use of variables. Suggestions include using the notation \forall (x ∈ R^+, z ∈ Z^+) \exists y ∈ R^+ to clarify the relationships among the variables. The conversation emphasizes the importance of precise notation in mathematical logic translations.
SolarMidnite
Messages
20
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



No matter what positive real number x we choose, there exists some positive real number y
such that yz2 > xz + 10 for every positive integer z.

Translate the above statement to predicate logic and prove it using a direct approach.

Homework Equations



I don't believe that there are relevant equations for this problem.

The Attempt at a Solution



Let Q (x, y, z) = yz2 > xz + 10

\forallx ∈ ℝ+ \existsy ∈ ℝ+ \forallz ∈ Z+ Q(x, y, z)

Before I attempted to prove the theorem, I wanted to make sure that I got the predicate logic translation right. I don't think that the above translation is right, but I hope I'm on the right track. I've never translated into predicate logic with 3 variables. It's usually just x and y, so should it be (x, y, z)? Also, does \forallz ∈ Z+ come after Q (x, y, z) since it does in the statement?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
SolarMidnite said:

Homework Statement



No matter what positive real number x we choose, there exists some positive real number y
such that yz2 > xz + 10 for every positive integer z.

Translate the above statement to predicate logic and prove it using a direct approach.

Homework Equations



I don't believe that there are relevant equations for this problem.

The Attempt at a Solution



Let Q (x, y, z) = yz2 > xz + 10

\forallx ∈ ℝ+ \existsy ∈ ℝ+ \forallz ∈ Z+ Q(x, y, z)

Before I attempted to prove the theorem, I wanted to make sure that I got the predicate logic translation right. I don't think that the above translation is right, but I hope I'm on the right track. I've never translated into predicate logic with 3 variables. It's usually just x and y, so should it be (x, y, z)? Also, does \forallz ∈ Z+ come after Q (x, y, z) since it does in the statement?
I would write it this way.

\forall (x ∈ R^+, z ∈ Z^+) \exists y ∈ R^+ \ni Q(x, y, z)

In addition to other changes, I also replaced ℝwith R, since ℝis so tiny I can barely tell it's a version of the letter R.

There's a nicer one that you can get with mathbb{R}, as in
\mathbb{R}.
 
I picked up this problem from the Schaum's series book titled "College Mathematics" by Ayres/Schmidt. It is a solved problem in the book. But what surprised me was that the solution to this problem was given in one line without any explanation. I could, therefore, not understand how the given one-line solution was reached. The one-line solution in the book says: The equation is ##x \cos{\omega} +y \sin{\omega} - 5 = 0##, ##\omega## being the parameter. From my side, the only thing I could...
Back
Top