Proving a sufficient condition, can someone check my work

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of divisibility, specifically examining the relationship between integers divisible by 8 and those divisible by 16. Participants are exploring whether a sufficient condition can be established based on definitions of divisibility.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the original proof attempt, questioning the validity of the statement that if an integer is divisible by 8, it must also be divisible by 16. Some participants seek clarification on the definition of 'divisible' and challenge the proof's logic.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing feedback on the original proof and suggesting a revised approach. There is recognition of a potential misunderstanding regarding the direction of the implication in the original statement.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original claim was misinterpreted, leading to confusion about the sufficient condition being discussed. The conversation reflects an ongoing exploration of the definitions and implications of divisibility.

mr_coffee
Messages
1,613
Reaction score
1
ello ello!

I think i did this right but not sure! The directions are: Determine whether the statement is true or false. Prove the statement directly from the definitions or give a counter exmaple if it is false.

A sufficient condition for an integer to be divisble by 8 is hat it be divisble by 16.

\forall integers n, if n is divisble by 8, then n is divisble by 16. This is a true statement.
Proof: Suppose n is an integer divisble by 8. BY definition of divisbility, n = 8k for some integer k. But, 8k = 4*2k, and 2k is an integer because k is. Hence n = 4*(some integer) and so n is divisble by 16.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mr_coffee said:
...\forall integers n, if n is divisble by 8, then n is divisble by 16. This is a true statement.
Proof: Suppose n is an integer divisble by 8. BY definition of divisbility, n = 8k for some integer k. But, 8k = 4*2k, and 2k is an integer because k is. Hence n = 4*(some integer) and so n is divisble by 16.

Thanks!

What exactly do you mean by 'divisible'? Is it that the quotient must be an integer?
 
mr_coffee said:
Hence n = 4*(some integer) and so n is divisble by 16.

Where did this come from? You've shown n is divisible by 4, not 16.
 
16n=8(2n)
Maybe that could be used for something.
 
mr_coffee said:
\forall integers n, if n is divisble by 8, then n is divisble by 16. This is a true statement.

Take n=8. n is divisble by 8, but n is not divisible by 16.

You tried to prove:

"If n is divisible by 8 then it is divisible by 16".

but in fact you showed:

"if n is divisible by 8 then it is divisible by 4"


But they actually claimed:

"A sufficient condition for an integer to be divisble by 8 is hat it be divisble by 16."

In otherwords, "if n is divisible by 16 then it is divisible by 8."
 
Thanks guys!

OKay i rewrote it using, ""if n is divisible by 16 then it is divisible by 8.""

\forall integers n, if n is divisble by 16, then n is divisble by 8. This is a true statement.

Proof: Suppose n is an integer divisble by 16. By definition of divsibilty, n = 16k for some integer k. But, 16k = (8)(2k), and 2k is an integer because k is. Hence n = 8(some integer) and so n is divisble by 16.

I think i had it switched around as shmoe pointed out
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
8K