Need help with two simple proofs

  • Thread starter Thread starter eku_girl83
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proofs
eku_girl83
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
Here's my problem:
Provide either a proof or a counterexample for each of these statements.
a) For all real numbers x and y, if x is greater than 1 and y is greater than zero, then y^x is greater than x.

My proof:
Suppose x is some real number greater than 1 and y is some real number greater than 0.
Suppose x=2 and y=1/4.
Then y^x=(1/4)^2=1/16 and 1/16=y^x is less than x=2.
Now suppose that x=3 and y=2.
Then y^x=2^3=8 and 8=y^x is greater than x=3.
Hence if x is greater than 1 and 0 less than y less than or equal to 1, then y^x is less than or equal to x.
But if x is greater than 1 and y is greater than 1, then y^x is greater than x.
Therefore the statement "if x is greater than 1 and y is greater than 0, then y^x is greater than x" is not true for all real numbers x and y.

Is this a good proof? How can I improve it or make it clearer?

b) For integers a, b, c, if a divides bc, then either a divides b or a divides c.

I'm not really sure where to go with this one, so hints would be welcome.
I do know that if a divides bc, then bc=ak, where k is a natural number.
Similarly, a divides b means that b=aj and a divides c means that c=ai, where j and i are also natural numbers.
Which proof techinique do I use here? contradiction, contraposition, or direct proof?

Thanks ahead of time,
eku_girl83
 
Physics news on Phys.org
your first proof looks solid ..
what u have done is simply give a counter example
u could have chosen some simpler values say,
x=2 and y=0.1 so (0.1)^2 = 0.01 < 2
QED

your second is again a counterexample one,
a = 12 b = 4 and c=6
QED

-- AI
 
1) A proof is something that must be true for all x and y satisfying those constraints.
So ypu've not proven the statement. You have found a counter example. I do'nt understand why after finding a counter example you do something else too.
Your deduction

"But if x is greater than 1 and y is greater than 1, then y^x is greater than x."

based upon those two examples is also not true.

2) do you think it's true? hint that is sometimes used as a definition for what it means fo a to be a prime.
 
if u ask me
a proof is either the one that validates the statement or invalidates it

so i still accept that as a proof.

Usuall such questions are tagged with,
" prove or disprove blah blah blah..."

-- AI
 
It asked for a proof that the statement is true or a counter example.
thus we may take the posters use of the word "proof" to indicate proving it true, when they post a counter example instead. (Ie prove it false), but the usage of the word is poor, and confusing, especially given that after giving a counter example, they then "prove" using one example a false statement.
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top