Proof: [itex]1\neq m\in\mathbb{N}, m-1\in\mathbb{N}[/itex]

  • Thread starter Thread starter nuuskur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
8 replies · 2K views
Science Advisor
Messages
929
Reaction score
1,226

Homework Statement


Given that [itex]m\in\mathbb{N}[/itex] and [itex]m\neq 1[/itex], show that [itex]m-1\in\mathbb{N}[/itex]
For this problem assume [itex]\mathbb{N} = \{1,2,...\}[/itex], also known as the product of all inductive sets.

Homework Equations


Inductive subset: A subset [itex]S\in\mathbb{R}[/itex] is inductive if:
1) [itex]1\in S[/itex] (##1## is to be considered as the unit element for which ##1x = x1 = x## for every ##x##.
2) If [itex]x\in S[/itex], then [itex]x+1\in S[/itex] for every [itex]x\in S[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution


Going to use the method ([itex]A\Rightarrow B\Leftrightarrow \neg B\Rightarrow\neg A[/itex]) (kontraposition?)
Assume [itex]m\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{1\}[/itex]. If [itex]m-1\notin\mathbb{N}[/itex] then [itex]\mathbb{N}\setminus\{m\}=:M[/itex] is inductive.
If the above implication holds then we can say that if [itex]M[/itex] is not inductive then [itex]m-1\in\mathbb{N}[/itex]

Then let [itex]m\neq 1[/itex]
Def 1) We can say that [itex]1\in M[/itex]
Def 2) Let [itex]n\in M[/itex], then [itex]n\in\mathbb{N}[/itex] and because [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex] is inductive, [itex]n+1\in\mathbb{N}[/itex]. We can also say that [itex]n+1\neq m[/itex], from which [itex]n+1\in M[/itex].
Hence [itex]M[/itex] is inductive.

Problem is with the part where I say [itex]n+1\neq m[/itex], intuitively I know it's correct, but how do I justify this exactly?
Will it suffice to say that addition is an algebraic operation? Therefore [itex]n+1= m[/itex] is impossible.

But from the definition of inductive subset, [itex]M[/itex] cannot be inductive for [itex]\mathbb{N} = \mathbb{N}\setminus\{m\}[/itex] is impossible (because every inductive subset has to contain [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex]) and we have that [itex]m-1\in\mathbb{N}[/itex], if [itex]m\neq 1[/itex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You have left m and n essentially arbitrary. So m=3 and n=2 is a possibility. This would make n+1=m.

I think you have to use that ##\mathbb N## has the property that there are no elements in that set other than the ones that are mentioned in the definition of "inductive set".
 
Fredrik said:
You have left m and n essentially arbitrary. So m=3 and n=2 is a possibility. This would make n+1=m.

I think you have to use that ##\mathbb N## has the property that there are no elements in that set other than the ones that are mentioned in the definition of "inductive set".
The set M does not contain 3, Therefore 2+1, which is an algebraic operation, for both 2 and 1 are in M, has to be contained within the set M.
 
Sorry, that was a silly mistake by me. I'm not sure I have time to think about how to figure out how to turn your approach into a complete proof, but I see a simpler one. It's based on the idea that the statement ##m\in\mathbb N## implies one of two mutually exclusive possibilities, one of which is ##m=1##. What I have in mind for the other one is something more useful than the obvious ##m\neq 1##. Since the ##m=1## possibility is ruled out by assumption, the other one must be a true statement.
 
Fredrik said:
Sorry, that was a silly mistake by me. I'm not sure I have time to think about how to figure out how to turn your approach into a complete proof, but I see a simpler one. It's based on the idea that the statement ##m\in\mathbb N## implies one of two mutually exclusive possibilities, one of which is ##m=1##. What I have in mind for the other one is something more useful than the obvious ##m\neq 1##. Since the ##m=1## possibility is ruled out by assumption, the other one must be a true statement.
Assuming I get this right you mean to get at: ##m =1\vee m\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{1\}## We know that ##m\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{1\} =: A##, but then what is ##m+(-1)##? This, at least, is the first thing I tried, but because it isn't an algebraic operation I can't say anything about ##m-1## so I couldn't get anywhere with it.
 
Think of a property that every element of ##\mathbb N## except 1 has. If ##m## is an element of ##\mathbb N## such that ##m\neq 1##, then ##m## must have that property.
 
The only thing I can think of right now is if ##m\neq 1## then there always exist ##p,q\in\mathbb{N}## such that ##p< m < q##, but then again it sounds like something that needs to be proven first.
 
It's hard to tell you something without giving away the complete solution, but if we define ##s(x)=x+1## for each ##x\in\mathbb N##, then what is the range of the function ##s##?
 
Fredrik said:
It's hard to tell you something without giving away the complete solution, but if we define ##s(x)=x+1## for each ##x\in\mathbb N##, then what is the range of the function ##s##?
##[2,\infty)##.. right, I get where this is going, thanks :D