What is the flaw in the statement about T and how can it be corrected?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jamin2112
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Natural
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a statement concerning a set T of natural numbers defined by certain conditions involving a natural number m. Participants are tasked with identifying a flaw in the statement and suggesting a correction.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the conditions defining the set T, questioning the relationship between m and potential elements like m-1. There is uncertainty about how the conditions connect and whether the proposed equation for T is valid.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants raising questions about the inclusion of m-1 in T and its implications for the definition of T. Some guidance has been offered regarding the nature of T and its elements, but no consensus has been reached on the flaw or correction.

Contextual Notes

Participants are considering the implications of the conditions on T, particularly regarding the potential exclusion of certain natural numbers based on the definition provided. There is a focus on understanding the boundaries of the set T as defined by the conditions.

Jamin2112
Messages
973
Reaction score
12

Homework Statement



Let m be a natural number. Find the flaw in the statement below. Explain why the statement is not valid, and change one symbol to correct it.

"If T is a set of natural numbers such that 1) m [tex]\in[/tex] T and 2) n [tex]\in[/tex] T implies n+1 [tex]\in[/tex] T, then T = {n [tex]\in[/tex] N : n ≥ m}

Homework Equations



Dunno.

The Attempt at a Solution



Part 2) of the if statement tells us that T is an infinite set. I'm not sure exactly how 1) and 2) are connected. Hmmmm ...

Help me get started.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To get started think about this. Is m-1 in T?
 
Dick said:
To get started think about this. Is m-1 in T?

Hmmm ...

T is going to look something like {k, k+1, k+2, ...}, where k≥1 is an integer. That's basically what the second condition tells me.

m is some element in T. That's all I know about m. Could m-1 be in T? As long as m>k.
 
So is their equation for T correct?
 
Jamin2112 said:
Hmmm ...

T is going to look something like {k, k+1, k+2, ...}, where k≥1 is an integer. That's basically what the second condition tells me.

m is some element in T. That's all I know about m. Could m-1 be in T? As long as m>k.

Ok, so you don't know if m-1 is in T. On the other hand, m-1 is definitely NOT in [m,infinity). That suggests that T and [m,infinity) are not necessarily the same thing.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K