On the Implication of Addition Axioms

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of different proofs for the proposition that if \( x+y=x+z \), then \( y=z \). Participants explore the implications of addition axioms, particularly focusing on the necessity of certain assumptions such as the uniqueness of additive inverses and the additive identity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • The original poster (OP) presents a proof for the proposition using basic properties of addition.
  • Rudin's proof is cited as an alternative approach, which some participants believe is essentially the same as the OP's proof.
  • Some participants argue that both proofs are valid under certain assumptions, specifically the existence and uniqueness of additive inverses and the additive identity, as well as the associativity of addition.
  • Others challenge the necessity of assuming uniqueness, questioning how the proof would hold without it, particularly in the context of the identity element.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of using non-unique identities in the proofs, suggesting that it could lead to ambiguity in the results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that both proofs are correct, but there is disagreement regarding the necessity of certain assumptions, particularly the uniqueness of additive inverses and the additive identity. The discussion remains unresolved on this point.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the implications of not assuming uniqueness in the context of the proofs, particularly regarding how certain expressions would be interpreted without it.

OhMyMarkov
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone!

I was trying to prove the propositions that follow the addition axioms as a revision, I got a different proof for the following proposition:

If $x+y=x+z$ then $y=z$

My proof was the following:
$x+y=x+z$, $(-x)+x+y=(-x)+x+z$, $0+y=0+z$, $y=z$

Rudin however, in his book, provides a different proof:
$y=0+y=(-x+x)+y=-x+(x+y)=-x+(x+z)=(-x+x)+z=0+z=z$

This is how I was thinking, I start from the condition, to reach the result. Is my proof incorrect?
Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think both proofs are fine, so long as you can assume the following:

1. Existence and uniqueness of additive inverses
2. Existence and uniqueness of the additive identity
3. Associativity of addition
 
It is not necessary to assume the uniqueness of additive inverses and the additive identity.

I agree that both proofs are correct and essentially the same. In some formal calculi, which identify proofs with simple variations, they may literally be the same proof.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
It is not necessary to assume the uniqueness of additive inverses and the additive identity.

I agree that both proofs are correct and essentially the same. In some formal calculi, which identify proofs with simple variations, they may literally be the same proof.

Are you sure you don't need uniqueness of, say, the identity? I'm just wondering how
$$y=0+y=(-x+x)+y$$
would work if you didn't have uniqueness. How could you be sure that $-x+x=0$ and not $-x+x=0'$?
 
The OP's proof does not use the uniqueness.

Ackbach said:
Are you sure you don't need uniqueness of, say, the identity? I'm just wondering how
$$y=0+y=(-x+x)+y$$
would work if you didn't have uniqueness. How could you be sure that $-x+x=0$ and not $-x+x=0'$?
You could use the 0 for which -x + x = 0. Then you rewrite y as 0 + y using that particular 0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K