Prove the following \[\forall a,b \in \mathbb{r}, a < 0, b < 0 \implies a * b > 0\] Prove the following \[\forall a,b \in \mathbb{r}, a < 0, b < 0 \implies a * b > 0\] @Mathematics
because minus * minus is plus result that this is true allways
I need a stronger proof
right ???
suppose that not is true and check the result so by reductio ad abbsurdum prove style, methode
the book says you have to begin by first proving the following statement\[(-a) * b = -(a * b)\]
sorry
(-a) * b + a*b = b(-a + a) = b*0 = 0, which we proved in the previous question hence, (-a)*b + a*b -(a*b) = -(a*b) therefore, (-a)*b = -(a*b)
a<0, b<0 this implies -a> and -b>o this implies (-a)(-b)>0 this implies ab>0(because (-a)(-b)=ab)
ok, this is my attempt at this: you already proved that (-a)*b + ab = 0 therefore: -b*( (-a)*b + a*b ) = 0 (-b)*(-a)*b + (-b)*a*b = 0 ( (-b)*(-a) + (-b)*a )*b = 0 (-b)*(-a) + (-b)*a = 0 you also proved (-a)*b = -(a*b) therefore: (-b)*a = -(a*b) plug this into above to get: (-b)*(-a) + -(a*b) = 0 therefore: (-b)*(-a) = (a*b)
@asnaseer that was how the book did it
Consider a number \(c\) defined as \(c=ab+(-a)(b)+(-a)(-b)=ab+(-a)[b+(-b)]\). \(b+(-b)=0\). Therefor \(c=ab+(-a)[0] \implies c=ab\). We can also write \(c=b(a+(-a))+(-a)(-b) \implies c=b(0)+(-a)(-b)=(-a)(-b).\) We have \(c=ab\) and \(c=(-a)(-b)\), which implies that \(ab=(-a)(-b)\).
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!