Proving Inequalities: Tips and Strategies for Success

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kernul
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inequality
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving various properties of inequalities, specifically involving the relationships between variables a, b, and c under different conditions. The participants are exploring the implications of these inequalities and the necessary cases to consider in their proofs.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the necessity of considering multiple cases for each inequality and question whether it is essential to do so. Some suggest that using definitions of inequalities might simplify the process. Others explore the validity of steps taken in proofs and the implications of assumptions made during reasoning.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants providing insights and questioning each other's reasoning. Some have offered clarifications on the definitions of inequalities, while others are still grappling with the implications of their approaches. There is no explicit consensus, but productive dialogue is taking place.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the constraints of the problem, including the need to consider cases such as when variables are equal to or greater than zero. There is also a focus on avoiding circular reasoning in their proofs.

Kernul
Messages
211
Reaction score
7

Homework Statement


Prove the following facts about inequalities. [In each problem you will have to consider several
cases separately, e.g. ##a > 0## and ##a = 0##.]
(a) If ##a \leq b##, then ##a + c \leq b + c##.
(b) If ##a \geq b##, then ##a + c \geq b + c##.
(c) If ##a \leq b## and ##c \geq 0##, then ##ac \leq bc##.
(d) If ##a \leq b## and ##c \leq 0##, then ##ac \geq bc##.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


So, I've tried to prove the first one (the second is basically the first one but with inequalities inverted) the following way:
If ##a > 0, b > 0## or ##a < 0, b < 0## (do I really have to say that ##b> 0## too?)
##a \leq b \implies a + c \leq b + c##
##a + (c + (-c)) \leq b + (c + (-c))##
##(a + c) + (-c) \leq (b + c) + (-c)##
##a + c \leq b + c##
If ##a = 0, b > 0##
##0 \leq b \implies c \leq b + c##
##(c + (-c)) \leq b + (c + (-c))##
##c + (-c) \leq (b + c) + (-c)##
##c \leq b + c##
So it's proved, right?
Now, going to (c), we have this ##c \geq 0## that stops me from using ##c^{-1}## to prove them because it's not ##c > 0##.
Which other way can I prove the last two?

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't notice the inequalities were wrong.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Kernul said:

Homework Statement


Prove the following facts about inequalities. [In each problem you will have to consider several
cases separately, e.g. ##a > 0## and ##a = 0##.]
(a) If ##a <= b##, then ##a + c <= b + c##.
(b) If ##a >= b##, then ##a + c >= b + c##.
(c) If ##a <= b## and ##c >= 0##, then ##ac <= bc##.
(d) If ##a <= b## and ##c <= 0##, then ##ac >= bc##.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


So, I've tried to prove the first one (the second is basically the first one but with inequalities inverted) the following way:
If ##a > 0, b > 0## or ##a < 0, b < 0## (do I really have to say that ##b> 0## too?)
##a <= b \implies a + c <= b + c##
##a + (c + (-c)) <= b + (c + (-c))##
##(a + c) + (-c) <= (b + c) + (-c)##
##a + c <= b + c##
If ##a = 0, b > 0##
##0 <= b \implies c <= b + c##
##(c + (-c)) <= b + (c + (-c))##
##c + (-c) <= (b + c) + (-c)##
##c <= b + c##
So it's proved, right?
Now, going to (c), we have this ##c >= 0## that stops me from using ##c^{-1}## to prove them because it's not ##c > 0##.
Which other way can I prove the last two?

Looking at several cases for each part is a waste of time; in every part there is no need at all for "cases". Just use an appropriate definition of "≤" or "≥".
 
Ray Vickson said:
Looking at several cases for each part is a waste of time; in every part there is no need at all for "cases". Just use an appropriate definition of "≤" or "≥".
An appropriate definition of ##\leq## and ##\geq##? Wouldn't that be:
##a \leq b## means ##a < b## or ## a = b##
##a \geq b## means ##a > b## or ## a = b##
 
Kernul said:
An appropriate definition of ##\leq## and ##\geq##? Wouldn't that be:
##a \leq b## means ##a < b## or ## a = b##
##a \geq b## means ##a > b## or ## a = b##

What does ##a < b## mean? What is a very simple way to test if ##a < b##?

Anyway, I did not claim that what you are doing is wrong; I am just saying it is not the fastest way.

To deal with your original question: in your argument you started with ##a \leq b##, then got ##(a+c) + (-c) \leq (b+c) + (-c)##, then canceled the "##(-c)##' on both sides to end up with ##a+c \leq b+c##. However, that last step is invalid: it basically assumes what you are trying to prove, because if you set ##A = a+c## and ##B = b+c## you are going from ##A -c \leq B-c ## to ##A \leq B##---but you have not proved that yet.
 
Last edited:
Ray Vickson said:
What does ##a < b## mean? What is a very simple way to test if ##a < b##?
##a < b## means that ##a## is a number smaller than ##b##.
To see if ##b - a## is still a positive number? If it's negative it means that actually ##a > b##.
 
Kernul said:
##a < b## means that ##a## is a number smaller than ##b##.
To see if ##b - a## is still a positive number? If it's negative it means that actually ##a > b##.

Now you are getting it (in your second sentence above).
 
Ray Vickson said:
What does ##a < b## mean? What is a very simple way to test if ##a < b##?

Anyway, I did not claim that what you are doing is wrong; I am just saying it is not the fastest way.

To deal with your original question: in your argument you started with ##a \leq b##, then got ##(a+c) + (-c) \leq (b+c) + (-c)##, then canceled the "##(-c)##' on both sides to end up with ##a+c \leq b+c##. However, that last step is invalid: it basically assumes what you are trying to prove, because if you set ##A = a+c## and ##B = b+c## you are going from ##A -c \leq B-c ## to ##A \leq B##---but you have not proved that yet.
Oh right. I can't think of any way to proceed from that part right now.

Ray Vickson said:
Now you are getting it (in your second sentence above).
So I should simply see if ##(b + c) - (a + c) > 0##?
 
Kernul said:
Oh right. I can't think of any way to proceed from that part right now.So I should simply see if ##(b + c) - (a + c) > 0##?

That is the way I would do it (although I would use "##\geq##" instead of "##>##").
 
Ray Vickson said:
That is the way I would do it (although I would use "##\geq##" instead of "##>##").
Oh yes.
Doing like that I would end up with ##b + c - a - c \geq 0## and so ##b - a \geq 0##. But does this really prove what I was trying to prove? Isn't this the opposite way since I started directly with ##a + c \leq b + c##, which was what I had to end up while proving?
 
  • #10
Kernul said:
Oh yes.
Doing like that I would end up with ##b + c - a - c \geq 0## and so ##b - a \geq 0##. But does this really prove what I was trying to prove? Isn't this the opposite way since I started directly with ##a + c \leq b + c##, which was what I had to end up while proving?

No: you assume ##a \leq b##, which means that ##b-a \geq 0##. However, ##(b+c) - (a+c) = b-a,## so we have ##(b+c) -(a+c) \geq 0##, which means (by definition) that ##b+c \geq a+c##. No circular arguments are involved; just elementary algebra.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kernul
  • #11
Ray Vickson said:
No: you assume ##a \leq b##, which means that ##b-a \geq 0##. However, ##(b+c) - (a+c) = b-a,## so we have ##(b+c) -(a+c) \geq 0##, which means (by definition) that ##b+c \geq a+c##. No circular arguments are involved; just elementary algebra.
Oh, now I get it.
Thank you very much.
 

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K