Proof That If 0 ≤ X < n, X Must Equal 0

  • Thread starter Thread starter sedaw
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the statement that if \(0 \leq X < n\) for some positive \(n\), then \(X\) must equal 0. Participants are exploring the implications of this assertion within the context of real numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to prove the statement through contradiction, questioning the validity of the original claim. Some provide counterexamples, such as \(x = 1\) and \(n = 2\), to illustrate that the statement does not hold universally. Others are clarifying the conditions under which the proof is being made, particularly regarding the nature of \(n\) and \(X\).

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with multiple participants questioning the assumptions and definitions involved in the proof. Counterexamples have been presented, and there is an ongoing dialogue about the correctness of the original claim and the nature of the proof being attempted.

Contextual Notes

There is some confusion regarding the interpretation of the problem statement, particularly whether it applies to all real numbers or only integers. Participants are also discussing the need for clarity in the problem formulation and the implications of the assumptions made.

sedaw
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
need to prove that if [tex]0\leq X<n[/tex]

and also 0<n so x=0.

The attempt at a solution

assume that x>0

[tex]\exists n, x\ni(0,\infty) |n< x[/tex]

contradiction !

for X<0 there's contradiction agin .

from here X have to be 0

is that right ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
x=1, n=2>0 satisfies [itex]0\leq x<n[/itex], yet x does not equal zero.
 
Pere Callahan said:
x=1, n=2>0 satisfies [itex]0\leq x<n[/itex], yet x does not equal zero.

that is right but the porve is for each X so if there's only one case its enough .
 
sedaw said:
that is right but the porve is for each X so if there's only one case its enough .

What are you trying to prove? I was under the impression that it is the following:
Whenever 0<=x<n for some positive (integer?) n, then x must be zero.
I gave a counter example that this is not always the case. As you said, one example is enough to show that the statement above is wrong.
 
Pere Callahan said:
What are you trying to prove? I was under the impression that it is the following:
Whenever 0<=x<n for some positive (integer?) n, then x must be zero.
I gave a counter example that this is not always the case. As you said, one example is enough to show that the statement above is wrong.

not integer all the real num.

so what u suggest ?
 
sedaw said:
not integer all the real num.

so what u suggest ?

My counterexample is still valid.
I suggest, you say what you are trying to prove and what you don't like about the counter example:smile:
 
Pere Callahan said:
My counterexample is still valid.
I suggest, you say what you are trying to prove and what you don't like about the counter example:smile:

what`s not clear i need to prove that if x a real positive num and [tex]0\leq X<n[/tex]

for each real posiive uumber n so x=0 .
 
sedaw said:
need to prove that if [tex]0\leq X<n[/tex]

and also 0<n so x=0.
This makes no sense. Do you mean you want to prove:
"if [itex]0\le x< n[/itex] for all real numbers n> 0, then x= 0"?

[/quote]The attempt at a solution

assume that x>0

[tex]\exists n, x\ni(0,\infty) |n< x[/tex]

contradiction !

for X<0 there's contradiction agin .

from here X have to be 0

is that right ?[/QUOTE]
 
sedaw said:
not integer all the real num.

so what u suggest ?
I would suggest that you care enough about the problem to at least copy the problem correctly!

The proof you give is by contradiction:
Suppose x> 0 then there exist n> 0 such that x> n.

But you give no proof that the last statement "there exist n> 0 such that> n" is true itself!
You need to construct such a number. If x> 0 then what positive number is less than x?
 
  • #10
HallsofIvy said:
I would suggest that you care enough about the problem to at least copy the problem correctly!

The proof you give is by contradiction:
Suppose x> 0 then there exist n> 0 such that x> n.

But you give no proof that the last statement "there exist n> 0 such that> n" is true itself!
You need to construct such a number. If x> 0 then what positive number is less than x?


0<x<n

x=0.01
n=0.02

n = all the real numbers so that n might be 0.00000000000000000001

so x have to be 0
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K