A community for students.
Here's the question you clicked on:
 0 viewing
kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
[Serious mode]
How to prove that 1≠2?
We have equality is transitive, we have 1's successor is 2, we have...
No theorem ever said that a successor cannot be equal to the number itself
No theorem ever said that two numbers with different looks cannot be equal
1.000... is equal to 0.999... for example
A number can have many ways of presenting...
ASSUMPTIONS: 2:=S(S(0)), 1:=S(0), where S(x) denotes the successor of x, where x is a natural number.
kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
[Serious mode] How to prove that 1≠2? We have equality is transitive, we have 1's successor is 2, we have... No theorem ever said that a successor cannot be equal to the number itself No theorem ever said that two numbers with different looks cannot be equal 1.000... is equal to 0.999... for example A number can have many ways of presenting... ASSUMPTIONS: 2:=S(S(0)), 1:=S(0), where S(x) denotes the successor of x, where x is a natural number.

This Question is Closed

dan815
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0now help me with my question

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1then how do you know that 0≠1?

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1Is there a very axiom or something

dan815
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.00 means u have 0 of 1 and 1 means you have 1 of 1

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1I want the name of the axiom/definition/theorem

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@ikram002p @ganeshie8 @primeralph

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1there is axioms that say for any integer n belong to z s.t z={0,1,2,...,n ,...} then n+1>n or 0>1 its depand on the groupe that u wanna make binary operation on :) u cud see Abstract Algebra books ull got it easilly

anonymous
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0It all depends on assignment. If I decided to assign two units to 1, then 1=2. In Math, two units has already been assigned to the figure 2 and is fixed in most cases.

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1How do you know that if a>b a can't be equal to b? @ikram002p

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@primeralph but do you have an axiom/definition/theorem that says 1≠2?

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@ikram002p and which axiom is that?

anonymous
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0You're dealing with notation and graphics here; this is not math.

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1all theorems are built on axioms all axioms are built on definitions all definitions are built on notation

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@primeralph notations are the basis of Maths.

anonymous
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0No. Notations are how we make things more appealing to understand.

anonymous
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0For example, math had advanced greatly even before 0 was included in numbers. They simply used nothingness to represent 0.

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1assume u have a,b belongs to z then u have another axiom sys that say 0 belongs to Z aa=0 u know this axiom right ? so if a>b then a=b+c s,t c belong to z if a=b then ab=0 its the thms, axioms on the binary operation of the "groups" idk if it has a unigue name , if u wanna ill check my old Abstract algebra book.

anonymous
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@kc_kennylau Are you talking about the real number system?

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1then b must equal a , cuz there is unique num that u cud add to a to give 0 ( but its depand on the groupe u have , n the operation that u r givven)

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@ikram002p how to prove that the axiom's converse also holds?

anonymous
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Addition axioms: (d) For every x in R there exists an element y in R, called the negative of x such that x+y=0

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1ohk , i checkd the book the definition said Group let G be a set together with a binary operation (usually called multiplication ) that assigns to each orderd pair (a,b) of elements of G an element in G denoted by ab.......} to the rest of it then u have a groupe of thms called Elementary properties of groups thm 1: uniqueness of the identity thm 2: cancellation thm 3: uniqueness of inverse thm 4 : socksshoes property .....

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1" how to prove that the axiom's converse also holds" u mean uniqueness of inverse ??

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1ohk to prove it on the addition operation for example u should know that thm 1: uniqueness of the identity (e=0) thm 2: cancellation ( if ab=cb then a=c) then prove uniqueness of inverse assume u have a,b,c belonge to z use contradiction let a+b=0 a+c=0 then conclude that b=c

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1sry typo "thm 2: cancellation ( if ab=cb then a=c)" its like this thm 2: cancellation ( if a+b=c+b then a=c)

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@ikram002p wow i appreciate your effort very much, I think that's all?

amoodarya
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0s=11+11+11+11+... suppose (wrong) s converge now let write 1+s as 1+s=1+{1+(11)+(11)+(11)+...}=1+{1+0+0+0...}=2 let write s+1 as 1+s=1 +{(11)+(11)+(11)+...}=1+{0}=1 now we have 1+s=1 and 1+s=2 so 1=2 but assumption was wrong from the first so by contradiction 1≠2

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@kc_kennylau idk if thats all lolz , its depand on u if u got it or not :P

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@amoodarya wow that's a cool approach i loved this approach, but I don't know if it'd be formal enough xPP

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1wats ur course name ?

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@ikram002p I think I very much got it: \[\begin{array}{lrl} \mbox{Lemma 1:}&\forall a\in\mathbb Z:&aa=0\\ \mbox{Lemma 2:}&\forall a\in\mathbb Z,\forall b\ne a:&ab\ne 0\\ \mbox{Lemma 3:}&\forall a,b\in\mathbb Z:&a>b\Rightarrow a\ne b\\ \mbox{Lemma 4:}&\forall n\in\mathbb Z:&s(n)\ne n\\ \mbox{THEOREM:}&&2\ne 1 \end{array}\]Is this correct?

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@ikram002p There is no course, I learn everything by myself+my dad.

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1But I have gone beyond what my dad can teach me, so I basically learn everything by myself (ain't erasing all the efforts of my dad)

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1wat u got is true , but there is no need to write them as lemmas , and wat u ment wid lemma 4 ? for the last one no its not THEOREM cuz u cud prove it using a basic groupe of thms :) but u r such a smart person good for u , hope u the best .

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1so what I wrote is enough?

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1I really want to prove by every single definitions+axioms.

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1ohk let me wrote the prove for u ok ? u wanna prove that 1 dnt equal 2 right ?

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1yes, thank you so much :D

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1Lemma 1 is an axiom, Lemma 2 you have proven it before, Lemma 3 corollary from Lemma 2, Lemma 4 you still not stated the source Theorem corollary from Lemma 4

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1And thank you for your blessing :D

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1ok using this axioms sys that i wrote before *********************************** ohk , i checkd the book the definition said Group let G be a set together with a binary operation (usually called multiplication ) that assigns to each orderd pair (a,b) of elements of G an element in G denoted by ab.......} to the rest of it then u have a groupe of thms called Elementary properties of groups thm 1: uniqueness of the identity thm 2: cancellation thm 3: uniqueness of inverse thm 4 : socksshoes property *********************************

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1let me tell u this lemma , thm , proposition all of them are the same , the oly difference btw is the priority of using , so u dnt simply write lemma abt somthin unless its new sup u creat , or book or somthing ok ??

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1oh i see, but I am mainly proving 1≠2, so all others I named them as lemmas

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Just a little comment: Assuming 1 = 0 implies that your field only has one element, since 0 is defined as the additive identity and 1, the multiplicative identity.

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@terenzreignz but what's the problem with just having one element in my very field? :)

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0There isn't a problem. But who wants to work with such a trivial field?

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Well, it all boils down to how useful it is to deal with the (the name for it is: ) Trivial Subgroup of the Group of real numbers....

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@terenzreignz that's exactly the problem, since there isn't in fact any theorem that states 1≠2.

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1or of which we can create this corollary.

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@kc_kennylau no need to tag me every time, it's *TJ* :P Anyway... clear this up by defining what exactly is 2.

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1lets us prove that 1 dnt = 2 from def :: let Z be our group on binary operation of addition so u already know that(all of them r thms ) 1_0 is the identity 2 for a,b,c belongs to Z if a+b=a+c then b=c 3_for every a there exist unique a^1 such that a+a^1 =0 . the proof , by contradiction assume 1=2 1=2 1+0=1+1 (use thm 2) 0=1 (which is contradictiom to thm 1that 0 is unique) done ! got it ?

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.12, according to peano's axioms, is the successor of 1. @terenzreignz

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@ikram002p wow this proof is so short, I love it very much :DDDDD Now the time has come to prove the uniqueness of the additive identity.

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1tj sorry i meant definition, and i realized that 2 is actually defined to be S(S(0)). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peano_axioms#Settheoretic_models

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1u need to know the Group first on binary and prove it in general . use contradiction assume u have two identity lets take e1,e1 so for a belonge to G a+e1=a a+e2=a a+e1=a+e2( use thm 2) e1=e2 which is contradiction done!

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1now prove theorem 2, thank you.

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Well actually, that article simply states that 2 CAN be defined as S(S(0)). Depending on your definition of 2, 1=2 may yet be true.

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Simply define 2 to be equal to 1. That already implying that your group/field is a trivial one.

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1ok, I now define 2 to be S(S(0)) and 1 to be S(0). (I'll edit the question to include this piece of detail)

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Then 1 is indeed not equal to 2.

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Suppose 1 = 2 S(0) = S(S(0)), by #6, S(0) is a natural number. by #1, 0 is a natural number by #8, 0 = S(0), contradicts #7

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1Then you have to prove S(a)=S(b)⇒a=b

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1Ouah j'adore cette preuve :D

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1C'est simple est courte :D

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1Je le recris comme sa: Suppose que 1=2. 1=2 S(0)=S(S(0)) (par definition) 0=S(0) (par #8) Donc contradiction

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0You skipped a bit... maths teachers can be very nitpicky.

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1Guess who my Maths teacher is :)

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1btw, what did I skip?

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Mostly what the contradiction is, exactly.

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1Je le recris encore comme sa: Suppose que 1=2. 1=2 S(0)=S(S(0)) (par definition) 0=S(0) (par #8) Donc contradiction (par #7)

terenzreignz
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Good enough, I guess.

anonymous
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0observational analysis dw:1388853436507:dw :

anonymous
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0If you are not sure how to tell that 1 is not = to 2, I would love for you to come and work for me. I'll give you $30 per hour...

anonymous
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0:) sorry I'm not in serious mode yet lol

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1will but u need to know it depand on the operation to prove that 1 dnt equal 2 let me give u example that 1= 2 1=0mod 1 2=0 mod 1 1=2 (on mod 1 operation )

kc_kennylau
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1that should be an equivalent sign.

ikram002p
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1:) note wat i wrote :o im talking abt the prove in "operation , groups"
Ask your own question
Sign UpFind more explanations on OpenStudy
Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.
spraguer
(Moderator)
5
→ View Detailed Profile
is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...
23
 Teamwork 19 Teammate
 Problem Solving 19 Hero
 Engagement 19 Mad Hatter
 You have blocked this person.
 ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...
Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.