Is the Statement True or False?: I Gave a Reason Why it is True

  • Thread starter Thread starter Miike012
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reason
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the truth value of a mathematical statement involving quantifiers and multiplicative inverses. Participants are analyzing the implications of the statement and its interpretation in the context of real numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants express confusion regarding the truth of the statement and its dependence on the quantifiers involved. There are attempts to clarify the meaning of fixed versus variable values of x and y, as well as the implications of existential and universal quantifications.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with various interpretations being explored. Some participants provide reasoning for their beliefs about the truth value of the statement, while others question the assumptions regarding the fixed nature of x in relation to y.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the definitions and implications of quantifiers in mathematical logic, particularly in the context of multiplicative inverses and the conditions under which the statement holds true.

Miike012
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
0
I don't understant how the statement is false. Because I gave a reason why it is true. Can someone explain please? thank u
 

Attachments

  • PDisc.jpg
    PDisc.jpg
    6.8 KB · Views: 478
Physics news on Phys.org
Miike012 said:
I don't understant how the statement is false. Because I gave a reason why it is true. Can someone explain please? thank u
Is F the "correct" answer?

As long as y ≠ 0, it has a multiplicative inverse 1/y. Then if x = 1/y, xy = (1/y)(y) = 1.
 
Mark44 said:
Is F the "correct" answer?

As long as y ≠ 0, it has a multiplicative inverse 1/y. Then if x = 1/y, xy = (1/y)(y) = 1.

Yes, F is the "correct" answer
But I believe the correct answer is T
 
Miike012 said:
Yes, F is the "correct" answer
But I believe the correct answer is T

Well, it's not true. Pay attention the quantifiers, it says there exists a fixed x such that for all y. x can't depend on y.
 
Dick said:
Well, it's not true. Pay attention the quantifiers, it says there exists a fixed x such that for all y. x can't depend on y.

So if an existential quantification of x is before the univeral quantification of y then that means that the value of x must be fixed?

what if it was the universal quant of y then the existential quan of x? Then would x still have to be fixed?
 
The way I am reading it is...
There exists a real number x such that for all real numbers y not equal to zero , the expression xy = 1.

Or basically how I am interpreting it is, Let y = a where a is a real number and not equal to zero, then we can find a value of x such that xa = 1. The value of x that we are looking for is x = 1/a. Then choose a number y = b such that b =/= a and not equal to zero, then we can find a value of x such that xb = 1.
We would repeat this process for all values y = a where a is all real numbers.
So as you can see in my understanding of the sentence, the value of x is not "fixed" as u say it is.
 
##\exists x \forall y (y \neq 0 \implies xy = 1)##
is false.

##\forall y \exists x (y \neq 0 \implies xy = 1)##
is true.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K