Proving Theorem 2: At Least 2 Games Played

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter narledge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theorem
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on proving Theorem 2, which states that at least two games are played given certain axioms about teams and their interactions. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and proof construction related to combinatorial game theory.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that since there are at least four teams and each game is played by two distinct teams, at least two games must be played based on the axioms provided.
  • Another participant challenges the proof by suggesting that it must consider all possible matchups among the teams to justify the conclusion of at least two games, indicating a potential gap in the reasoning.
  • A later reply proposes a method to demonstrate that if one team plays a game, there must be another distinct game involving a different team, thus supporting the claim of at least two games.
  • There is an acknowledgment that the assumption about the distinctness of games played between different pairs of teams is not explicitly stated in the axioms, which may affect the proof's validity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the sufficiency of the initial proof. While some support the idea that at least two games must be played, others argue that the proof lacks consideration of all possible cases, leaving the discussion unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the proof related to the assumptions made about the distinctness of games and the need for comprehensive case analysis to reach a valid conclusion.

narledge
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I need help with proving the theorem below

Axiom 1: Each game is played by two distinct teams.
Axiom 2: There are at least four teams.
Axiom 3: There are at least one game played by each team
Axiom 4: Each distinct team plays each of the other teams at most one time

Theorem 2: At minimum there are two games played
According to axiom 2, there are at least four teams and we will call them team A, B, C, D. Since axiom 1 requires that a game is played between two distinct games so team A could playing team C and team B could play D. Axiom 4 states that each team plays each of the other teams no more than once. Each of the four teams are playing at least one game which is required by axiom 3. Therefore, at minimum there are two games played.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
narledge said:
Since axiom 1 requires that a game is played between two distinct games so team A could playing team C and team B could play D.
What if A played B or D and the other two teams played among themselves? What if A played a team that is not B, C or D? A proof must consider all cases.

narledge said:
Axiom 4 states that each team plays each of the other teams no more than once.
This does not help advance the proof since this statement only limits the number of played games from above, while the theorem bounds them from below.

narledge said:
Each of the four teams are playing at least one game which is required by axiom 3. Therefore, at minimum there are two games played.
To justifiably say "therefore" you must consider different cases as described above, and in each case conclude that there are at least two games. Otherwise, this seems like a gap in the proof.
 
Thank you for your help, could your offer any additional assistance for how I could write it to make the proof correct?
 
I would start as you did: According to axiom 2, there are at least four teams and we will call them A, B, C, D. By Axiom 3, A played a game. Let's call its opponent in this game X. Then there is at least one team Y among B, C and D that is not X. By Axiom 3, Y also played a game, and that game must be different from the one between A and X since Y is distinct from both A and X. Thus, we found at least two games.

Note that I assume something that is not, strictly speaking, stated explicitly in the axioms, namely, that games between two different unordered pairs of teams are distinct. In other words, if X and Y played a game and U and V played a game and $\{X, Y\}\ne\{U, V\}$, then these are two different games.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
731
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K