Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In mathematics, proof by contrapositive, or proof by contraposition, is a rule of inference used in proofs, where one infers a conditional statement from its contrapositive. [15] In other words, the conclusion "if A , then B " is inferred by constructing a proof of the claim "if not B , then not A " instead.
The thing of importance is that the dog detects or does not detect an intruder, not whether there is one.) Example 1: If I am the burglar, then I can crack a safe. I cannot crack a safe. Therefore, I am not the burglar. Example 2: If Rex is a chicken, then he is a bird. Rex is not a bird. Therefore, Rex is not a chicken.
Given a type A statement, "All S are P.", one can make the immediate inference that "All non-P are non-S" which is the contrapositive of the given statement. Given a type O statement, "Some S are not P.", one can make the immediate inference that "Some non-P are not non-S" which is the contrapositive of the given statement.
The inverse and the converse of a conditional are logically equivalent to each other, just as the conditional and its contrapositive are logically equivalent to each other. [1] But the inverse of a conditional cannot be inferred from the conditional itself (e.g., the conditional might be true while its inverse might be false [2]). For example ...
There are many places to live in California other than San Diego. On the other hand, one can affirm with certainty that "if someone does not live in California" (non-Q), then "this person does not live in San Diego" (non-P). This is the contrapositive of the first statement, and it must be true if and only if the original statement is true ...
The complement of the intersection of two sets is the same as the union of their complements; or not (A or B) = (not A) and (not B) not (A and B) = (not A) or (not B) where "A or B" is an "inclusive or" meaning at least one of A or B rather than an "exclusive or" that means exactly one of A or B. De Morgan's law with set subtraction operation
For example, consider the true statement "If I am a human, then I am mortal." The converse of that statement is "If I am mortal, then I am a human," which is not necessarily true. However, the converse of a statement with mutually inclusive terms remains true, given the truth of the original proposition.
A typical example is the proof of the proposition "there is no smallest positive rational number": assume there is a smallest positive rational number q and derive a contradiction by observing that q / 2 is even smaller than q and still positive.