Determining and justifying the validity of an argumentIs “$n$ is an integer and $fracnn+1$ is an integer” true or false? Prove that if $m$ and $n$ are positive integers, and $x$ is a real number, then: $ceiling(fracceiling(x)+nm) = ceiling(fracx+nm)$A simple floor function conditional proofStatement and Proposed NegationsWhat is the contra-positive of an equality.Truth value of a false negationDiscrete Mathematics, Predicates and NegationDetermining the order of quantified statement after negationNegating the statementProof by contradiction involving positive integer prime numbers

Implement the Thanos sorting algorithm

Tiptoe or tiphoof? Adjusting words to better fit fantasy races

Select empty space and change color in vector

Will it be accepted, if there is no ''Main Character" stereotype?

How do I rename a LINUX host without needing to reboot for the rename to take effect?

Why does John Bercow say “unlock” after reading out the results of a vote?

Can I rely on these GitHub repository files?

Lay out the Carpet

Teaching indefinite integrals that require special-casing

Is a roofing delivery truck likely to crack my driveway slab?

Can I Retrieve Email Addresses from BCC?

HashMap containsKey() returns false although hashCode() and equals() are true

What if somebody invests in my application?

Is exact Kanji stroke length important?

What will be the benefits of Brexit?

Could you calculate the variance of data using the median or something other than the mean?

Modulo 2 binary long division in European notation

Was the picture area of a CRT a parallelogram (instead of a true rectangle)?

Efficiently merge handle parallel feature branches in SFDX

What is the intuitive meaning of having a linear relationship between the logs of two variables?

How can a jailer prevent the Forge Cleric's Artisan's Blessing from being used?

What was required to accept "troll"?

Are Warlocks Arcane or Divine?

What does the word "foliage" mean here?



Determining and justifying the validity of an argument


Is “$n$ is an integer and $fracnn+1$ is an integer” true or false? Prove that if $m$ and $n$ are positive integers, and $x$ is a real number, then: $ceiling(fracceiling(x)+nm) = ceiling(fracx+nm)$A simple floor function conditional proofStatement and Proposed NegationsWhat is the contra-positive of an equality.Truth value of a false negationDiscrete Mathematics, Predicates and NegationDetermining the order of quantified statement after negationNegating the statementProof by contradiction involving positive integer prime numbers













2












$begingroup$


Context: Question made up by uni lecturer



Original statement: There exists two positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ such that for all positive integers $z$, $fracxy>z$.



So the question was to find the negation of the statement, and then determine whether the original statement or its negation was true.



I found its negation to be: For all positive real numbers $x$ and $y$, there exists a positive integer $z$ such that $fracxyle z$.



The lecturer's solution to the question says that the negation is true since for any positive reals $x$ and $y$, you can choose $z$ to equal the ceiling of $fracxy$.



When I attempted the question myself, I said that the original statement is true because you can take $x=z+1$ (which would be a positive integer that still belongs to the set of all positive real numbers) and $y=1$ (which is a positive real number), as $fracxy=fracz+11=z+1>z$.



Can someone please help me to see the error in my answer.



Thanks










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$
















    2












    $begingroup$


    Context: Question made up by uni lecturer



    Original statement: There exists two positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ such that for all positive integers $z$, $fracxy>z$.



    So the question was to find the negation of the statement, and then determine whether the original statement or its negation was true.



    I found its negation to be: For all positive real numbers $x$ and $y$, there exists a positive integer $z$ such that $fracxyle z$.



    The lecturer's solution to the question says that the negation is true since for any positive reals $x$ and $y$, you can choose $z$ to equal the ceiling of $fracxy$.



    When I attempted the question myself, I said that the original statement is true because you can take $x=z+1$ (which would be a positive integer that still belongs to the set of all positive real numbers) and $y=1$ (which is a positive real number), as $fracxy=fracz+11=z+1>z$.



    Can someone please help me to see the error in my answer.



    Thanks










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$














      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$


      Context: Question made up by uni lecturer



      Original statement: There exists two positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ such that for all positive integers $z$, $fracxy>z$.



      So the question was to find the negation of the statement, and then determine whether the original statement or its negation was true.



      I found its negation to be: For all positive real numbers $x$ and $y$, there exists a positive integer $z$ such that $fracxyle z$.



      The lecturer's solution to the question says that the negation is true since for any positive reals $x$ and $y$, you can choose $z$ to equal the ceiling of $fracxy$.



      When I attempted the question myself, I said that the original statement is true because you can take $x=z+1$ (which would be a positive integer that still belongs to the set of all positive real numbers) and $y=1$ (which is a positive real number), as $fracxy=fracz+11=z+1>z$.



      Can someone please help me to see the error in my answer.



      Thanks










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      Context: Question made up by uni lecturer



      Original statement: There exists two positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ such that for all positive integers $z$, $fracxy>z$.



      So the question was to find the negation of the statement, and then determine whether the original statement or its negation was true.



      I found its negation to be: For all positive real numbers $x$ and $y$, there exists a positive integer $z$ such that $fracxyle z$.



      The lecturer's solution to the question says that the negation is true since for any positive reals $x$ and $y$, you can choose $z$ to equal the ceiling of $fracxy$.



      When I attempted the question myself, I said that the original statement is true because you can take $x=z+1$ (which would be a positive integer that still belongs to the set of all positive real numbers) and $y=1$ (which is a positive real number), as $fracxy=fracz+11=z+1>z$.



      Can someone please help me to see the error in my answer.



      Thanks







      discrete-mathematics






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked 5 hours ago









      Ruby PaRuby Pa

      376




      376




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3












          $begingroup$

          The problem with your reasoning is the order. There exist $x,y$ positive integers such that for all positive integers $z$ we have $fracxy>z$, so first you must pick an $x$ and a $y$, and then you must test whether $fracxy>z$ for every positive integer $z$. Therefore you can't define $x=z+1$ as when you pick $x$ you don't know $z$ yet.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$




















            3












            $begingroup$


            "There exists two positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ such that for all positive integer $z$ : $dfrac x y > z$"




            The intuition says that it is False. $dfrac x y$ is a positive real; thus, the statement amounts to asserting that there is a real that is greater than every integer, which is not.



            You reasoning is wrong because you have swapped the choice of the numbers : you start from $z$ and choose $x$ and $y$ accordingly.



            The negation of the original statement is : $forall x forall y exists z (dfrac y y le z)$.



            Thus, choose $x$ and $y$ positive whatever and what you get is a new positive real $dfrac x y$.



            Now, you have to choose an integer $z$ (obviously positive) that is greater-or-equal to $dfrac x y$.



            And this must be always possible, because $dfrac x y$ is a number $r.r_1 r_2 r_3 ldots$.



            Consider as $z$ the number $r+1$ and it's done.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$












              Your Answer





              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              );
              );
              , "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "69"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: true,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: 10,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader:
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              ,
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );













              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3163151%2fdetermining-and-justifying-the-validity-of-an-argument%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              3












              $begingroup$

              The problem with your reasoning is the order. There exist $x,y$ positive integers such that for all positive integers $z$ we have $fracxy>z$, so first you must pick an $x$ and a $y$, and then you must test whether $fracxy>z$ for every positive integer $z$. Therefore you can't define $x=z+1$ as when you pick $x$ you don't know $z$ yet.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$

















                3












                $begingroup$

                The problem with your reasoning is the order. There exist $x,y$ positive integers such that for all positive integers $z$ we have $fracxy>z$, so first you must pick an $x$ and a $y$, and then you must test whether $fracxy>z$ for every positive integer $z$. Therefore you can't define $x=z+1$ as when you pick $x$ you don't know $z$ yet.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$















                  3












                  3








                  3





                  $begingroup$

                  The problem with your reasoning is the order. There exist $x,y$ positive integers such that for all positive integers $z$ we have $fracxy>z$, so first you must pick an $x$ and a $y$, and then you must test whether $fracxy>z$ for every positive integer $z$. Therefore you can't define $x=z+1$ as when you pick $x$ you don't know $z$ yet.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  The problem with your reasoning is the order. There exist $x,y$ positive integers such that for all positive integers $z$ we have $fracxy>z$, so first you must pick an $x$ and a $y$, and then you must test whether $fracxy>z$ for every positive integer $z$. Therefore you can't define $x=z+1$ as when you pick $x$ you don't know $z$ yet.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 4 hours ago









                  Floris ClaassensFloris Claassens

                  1,13927




                  1,13927





















                      3












                      $begingroup$


                      "There exists two positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ such that for all positive integer $z$ : $dfrac x y > z$"




                      The intuition says that it is False. $dfrac x y$ is a positive real; thus, the statement amounts to asserting that there is a real that is greater than every integer, which is not.



                      You reasoning is wrong because you have swapped the choice of the numbers : you start from $z$ and choose $x$ and $y$ accordingly.



                      The negation of the original statement is : $forall x forall y exists z (dfrac y y le z)$.



                      Thus, choose $x$ and $y$ positive whatever and what you get is a new positive real $dfrac x y$.



                      Now, you have to choose an integer $z$ (obviously positive) that is greater-or-equal to $dfrac x y$.



                      And this must be always possible, because $dfrac x y$ is a number $r.r_1 r_2 r_3 ldots$.



                      Consider as $z$ the number $r+1$ and it's done.






                      share|cite|improve this answer











                      $endgroup$

















                        3












                        $begingroup$


                        "There exists two positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ such that for all positive integer $z$ : $dfrac x y > z$"




                        The intuition says that it is False. $dfrac x y$ is a positive real; thus, the statement amounts to asserting that there is a real that is greater than every integer, which is not.



                        You reasoning is wrong because you have swapped the choice of the numbers : you start from $z$ and choose $x$ and $y$ accordingly.



                        The negation of the original statement is : $forall x forall y exists z (dfrac y y le z)$.



                        Thus, choose $x$ and $y$ positive whatever and what you get is a new positive real $dfrac x y$.



                        Now, you have to choose an integer $z$ (obviously positive) that is greater-or-equal to $dfrac x y$.



                        And this must be always possible, because $dfrac x y$ is a number $r.r_1 r_2 r_3 ldots$.



                        Consider as $z$ the number $r+1$ and it's done.






                        share|cite|improve this answer











                        $endgroup$















                          3












                          3








                          3





                          $begingroup$


                          "There exists two positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ such that for all positive integer $z$ : $dfrac x y > z$"




                          The intuition says that it is False. $dfrac x y$ is a positive real; thus, the statement amounts to asserting that there is a real that is greater than every integer, which is not.



                          You reasoning is wrong because you have swapped the choice of the numbers : you start from $z$ and choose $x$ and $y$ accordingly.



                          The negation of the original statement is : $forall x forall y exists z (dfrac y y le z)$.



                          Thus, choose $x$ and $y$ positive whatever and what you get is a new positive real $dfrac x y$.



                          Now, you have to choose an integer $z$ (obviously positive) that is greater-or-equal to $dfrac x y$.



                          And this must be always possible, because $dfrac x y$ is a number $r.r_1 r_2 r_3 ldots$.



                          Consider as $z$ the number $r+1$ and it's done.






                          share|cite|improve this answer











                          $endgroup$




                          "There exists two positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ such that for all positive integer $z$ : $dfrac x y > z$"




                          The intuition says that it is False. $dfrac x y$ is a positive real; thus, the statement amounts to asserting that there is a real that is greater than every integer, which is not.



                          You reasoning is wrong because you have swapped the choice of the numbers : you start from $z$ and choose $x$ and $y$ accordingly.



                          The negation of the original statement is : $forall x forall y exists z (dfrac y y le z)$.



                          Thus, choose $x$ and $y$ positive whatever and what you get is a new positive real $dfrac x y$.



                          Now, you have to choose an integer $z$ (obviously positive) that is greater-or-equal to $dfrac x y$.



                          And this must be always possible, because $dfrac x y$ is a number $r.r_1 r_2 r_3 ldots$.



                          Consider as $z$ the number $r+1$ and it's done.







                          share|cite|improve this answer














                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer








                          edited 4 hours ago

























                          answered 4 hours ago









                          Mauro ALLEGRANZAMauro ALLEGRANZA

                          67.5k449116




                          67.5k449116



























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded
















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid


                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                              Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3163151%2fdetermining-and-justifying-the-validity-of-an-argument%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Era Viking Índice Início da Era Viquingue | Cotidiano | Sociedade | Língua | Religião | A arte | As primeiras cidades | As viagens dos viquingues | Viquingues do Oeste e Leste | Fim da Era Viquingue | Fontes históricas | Referências Bibliografia | Ligações externas | Menu de navegação«Sverige då!»«Handel I vikingetid»«O que é Nórdico Antigo»Mito, magia e religião na volsunga saga Um olhar sobre a trajetória mítica do herói sigurd«Bonden var den verklige vikingen»«Vikingatiden»«Vikingatiden»«Vinland»«Guerreiras de Óðinn: As Valkyrjor na Mitologia Viking»1519-9053«Esculpindo símbolos e seres: A arte viking em pedras rúnicas»1679-9313Historia - Tema: VikingarnaAventura e Magia no Mundo das Sagas IslandesasEra Vikinge

                              What's the metal clinking sound at the end of credits in Avengers: Endgame?What makes Thanos so strong in Avengers: Endgame?Who is the character that appears at the end of Endgame?What happens to Mjolnir (Thor's hammer) at the end of Endgame?The People's Ages in Avengers: EndgameWhat did Nebula do in Avengers: Endgame?Messing with time in the Avengers: Endgame climaxAvengers: Endgame timelineWhat are the time-travel rules in Avengers Endgame?Why use this song in Avengers: Endgame Opening Logo Sequence?Peggy's age in Avengers Endgame

                              Are there legal definitions of ethnicities/races? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Legal definitions in the United StatesAre there truly legal limits on US interest rates?Are gender identity and sexual orientation federally protected?Why is there an apparent legal bias against digital services?What limits are there to the powers of individual judges in the United States legal system?Are women only scholarships legal under Irish / EU law?Is the term “race” defined by Public Law enacted by Congress of the United StatesIs there a legal definition of race in the US?Neighbors are spying for landlord on Renters is it legal?Are Protected Classes Bi-directional?