Proving (x^2)>0: A Simple Guide

  • Thread starter Thread starter cacosomoza
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the inequality (x^2) > 0, with participants exploring various mathematical approaches and properties related to real numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants suggest different methods, including induction and properties of ordered fields. Some question the assumptions regarding the values of x, particularly whether x is non-zero.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights into the properties of real numbers and exploring the implications of the inequality. There is no explicit consensus on the approach to take, but several lines of reasoning are being examined.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted distinction between the cases when x is positive, negative, or zero, which influences the validity of the original inequality. Some participants also mention the need to clarify the conditions under which the inequality holds.

cacosomoza
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Pretty simple, how do I prove (x^2)>0 ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cacosomoza said:
Pretty simple, how do I prove (x^2)>0 ?

Why not use induction and try to prove it?
 
x belongs to R, not N, so I cannot apply induction
 
Assuming you meant to indicate that x is not equal to zero, then either x < 0 or x > 0.
Try using this property: If x < y and z > 0, then xz < yz, examining each case separately.
 
cacosomoza said:
Pretty simple, how do I prove (x^2)>0 ?
Well how you wrote it, it isn’t true since 0^2 = 0. You probably meant x^2 ≥ 0.

Since this is in the calculus and beyond forum do you know how to find minima for a function?

EDIT:
Or you could use the properties: that a positive real times a positive real is greater than 0, a negative real times a negative real is greater than 0.
 
Part of the requirements for any "ordered field" (which includes the field of real numbers but not the field of complex numbers) is that "if a< b and c> 0, then ac< bc". Take a= 0, b= x, c= x.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Part of the requirements for any "ordered field" (which includes the field of real numbers but not the field of complex numbers) is that "if a< b and c> 0, then ac< bc". Take a= 0, b= x, c= x.
slick
 

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K