Angie did the following proof in her logic class. Which step in the indirect proof did she do incorrectly?
Prove: 8 is divisible by 4.
Step 1: Assume that 8 is not divisible by four.
Step 2: 8 is divisible by 4
Step 3: 8 is divisible by 4.
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!
Sign Up
OpenStudy (anonymous):
can u help? @perl
OpenStudy (anonymous):
step 2
OpenStudy (anonymous):
you sure? @sourwing
OpenStudy (perl):
when we do indirect reasoning, we assume the negation of what we are trying to prove. so step 1 is correct. step 2 doesn't make sense (we dont assume the negation and the opposite of the negation)
OpenStudy (anonymous):
ok so its step 2 right?
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!
Sign Up
OpenStudy (perl):
i think so
OpenStudy (anonymous):
can u help with a few more?
OpenStudy (anonymous):
@perl
OpenStudy (perl):
ok
OpenStudy (anonymous):
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!
Sign Up
OpenStudy (anonymous):
@perl
OpenStudy (perl):
@timo86m im here
OpenStudy (perl):
i somehow landed here
OpenStudy (perl):
number 3 ?
OpenStudy (anonymous):
both please
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!
Sign Up
OpenStudy (anonymous):
step 3 I think because it is a repeat
OpenStudy (anonymous):
no isn't it step 2?
OpenStudy (perl):
the proof is a bit odd actually
OpenStudy (perl):
steps 2 and 3 are repeats , not sure why
OpenStudy (anonymous):
:( typo
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!
Sign Up
OpenStudy (anonymous):
i learned that u state the opposite, then u reason logically, then u conclude the assumption is false
OpenStudy (perl):
ok i think timo is right
OpenStudy (perl):
steps 1,2 taken together or steps 2,3 taken together are both wrong
OpenStudy (anonymous):
so which one is wrong? step 2 or 3?
OpenStudy (perl):
can you upload that question
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!
Sign Up
OpenStudy (anonymous):
yes one second
OpenStudy (anonymous):
OpenStudy (perl):
yeah im going to go with step 2
OpenStudy (perl):
how did she go from assuming 8 is not divisible by 4 , to 8 is divisible by 4 ?
OpenStudy (anonymous):
ok any idea on what the answer to question 3 is?
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!
Sign Up
OpenStudy (perl):
we want to prove
{p1 & p2 & p3 & p4 & p5} -> conclusion
OpenStudy (anonymous):
?
OpenStudy (anonymous):
okay thanks! do u no anybody that can come and double check the answers?
OpenStudy (anonymous):
@perl
OpenStudy (perl):
we want to prove the conditional:
{p1 & p2 & p3 & p4 & p5} -> conclusion
Now if we 'assume' ~c is true, then at least one of the five statements p1, p2, p3, p4 , p5 must be false. Otherwise if they are all true, then it is possible for all the premises to be true while the conclusion is false (since c is false whenever ~c is true),
in which case the original conditional is false. But we are given that the original conditional is true. This forces us to say , at least one of p1,p2,p3,p4,p5 is false . so at most 4 are true
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!
Sign Up
OpenStudy (anonymous):
what were u typing haha @perl
OpenStudy (perl):
oh i was correcting the logic of it
OpenStudy (perl):
writing logically correct statements is tricky
OpenStudy (anonymous):
do u think u can solve one more for me? @perl
OpenStudy (perl):
ok
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!
Sign Up
OpenStudy (anonymous):
OpenStudy (anonymous):
@perl
OpenStudy (perl):
i agree, the logical progression of the statements is inaccurate
OpenStudy (anonymous):
my answer is correct?
OpenStudy (perl):
i think so
Still Need Help?
Join the QuestionCove community and study together with friends!