ScholarQuill logoScholarQuillUniversity Notes
  • Notes
  • Past Papers
  • Blogs
  • Todo
Login
ScholarQuill logoScholarQuillUniversity Notes
Login
NotesPast PapersBlogsTodo
More
SubjectsDiscussionCGPA CalculatorGPA CalculatorStudent PortalCourse Outline
About
About usPrivacy PolicyReportContact
Notes
Past Papers
Blogs
Todo
Analytics
    Current Subject
    🧩
    Discrete Structures
    CSI-303
    Progress0 / 21 topics
    Topics
    1. Introduction to Logic and Proofs2. Direct Proofs3. Proof by Contradiction4. Sets5. Combinatorics6. Sequences7. Formal Logic8. Propositional and Predicate Calculus9. Methods of Proof10. Mathematical Induction and Recursion11. Loop Invariants12. Relations and Functions13. Pigeonhole Principle14. Trees and Graphs15. Elementary Number Theory16. Optimization and Matching17. Fundamental Structures18. Functions19. Relations (Recursions)20. Cardinality and Countability21. Probabilistic Methods
    CSI-303›Proof by Contradiction
    Discrete StructuresTopic 3 of 21

    Proof by Contradiction

    8 minread
    1,338words
    Intermediatelevel

    Proof by Contradiction

    Proof by contradiction (also called indirect proof) is a powerful and often elegant technique used to prove the truth of a statement. The basic idea is to assume that the statement you are trying to prove is false, and then show that this assumption leads to a contradiction—something that is logically impossible or contradictory. Since the assumption of falsehood leads to an illogical result, we conclude that the original statement must be true.

    This method is widely used in many areas of mathematics, especially when direct proof seems difficult or when the statement involves negations.

    Structure of a Proof by Contradiction

    1. Assume the negation of the statement to be true.
    2. Derive logical consequences from this assumption using known facts, definitions, and logical steps.
    3. Reach a contradiction—find an inconsistency or a situation that cannot happen (such as a false statement, two contradictory conclusions, or a violation of a known rule).
    4. Conclude that the original assumption must be false, meaning that the statement being proved is true.

    General Form of a Proof by Contradiction

    1. Assume the negation of the statement.
    2. Deduce consequences logically from this assumption.
    3. Identify a contradiction—an inconsistency with known facts, theorems, or axioms.
    4. Conclude that the assumption is false and therefore the original statement must be true.

    Example 1: Proving the Irrationality of 2\sqrt{2}2​

    Statement: Prove that 2\sqrt{2}2​ is irrational.

    Proof (by contradiction):

    1. Assume the opposite: Assume that 2\sqrt{2}2​ is rational. This means that it can be expressed as a fraction pq\frac{p}{q}qp​, where ppp and qqq are integers, and q≠0q \neq 0q=0. Additionally, assume that the fraction is in its simplest form, meaning that ppp and qqq have no common factors (i.e., they are coprime).

    2. From this assumption, we can write:

      2=pq\sqrt{2} = \frac{p}{q}2​=qp​

      Squaring both sides:

      2=p2q2⇒p2=2q22 = \frac{p^2}{q^2} \quad \Rightarrow \quad p^2 = 2q^22=q2p2​⇒p2=2q2

      This equation tells us that p2p^2p2 is an even number, because it is divisible by 2.

    3. Since p2p^2p2 is even, ppp itself must also be even. (This is because the square of an odd number is odd, so if p2p^2p2 is even, ppp must be even.) Therefore, we can write p=2kp = 2kp=2k, where kkk is some integer.

    4. Substituting p=2kp = 2kp=2k into the equation p2=2q2p^2 = 2q^2p2=2q2:

      (2k)2=2q2⇒4k2=2q2⇒2k2=q2(2k)^2 = 2q^2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad 4k^2 = 2q^2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad 2k^2 = q^2(2k)2=2q2⇒4k2=2q2⇒2k2=q2

      This shows that q2q^2q2 is also divisible by 2, so qqq must be even as well.

    5. Now, we have reached a contradiction. We initially assumed that ppp and qqq were coprime (i.e., they had no common factors), but we have shown that both ppp and qqq are even, meaning they both share 2 as a common factor. This contradicts our assumption that ppp and qqq are coprime.

    6. Since the assumption that 2\sqrt{2}2​ is rational leads to a contradiction, we conclude that the assumption is false. Therefore, 2\sqrt{2}2​ must be irrational.

    Conclusion: 2\sqrt{2}2​ is irrational.

    Example 2: Proving There Is No Smallest Positive Rational Number

    Statement: Prove that there is no smallest positive rational number.

    Proof (by contradiction):

    1. Assume the opposite: Suppose there exists a smallest positive rational number. Let this number be rrr. Therefore, r>0r > 0r>0 and rrr is a rational number.

    2. Since rrr is a rational number, we can write r=pqr = \frac{p}{q}r=qp​, where ppp and qqq are positive integers, and q≠0q \neq 0q=0.

    3. Consider the number r2=p2q\frac{r}{2} = \frac{p}{2q}2r​=2qp​. Clearly, r2\frac{r}{2}2r​ is a positive rational number, and it is smaller than rrr (since r2<r\frac{r}{2} < r2r​<r).

    4. But this contradicts our assumption that rrr is the smallest positive rational number because we have found a smaller rational number, r2\frac{r}{2}2r​.

    5. Therefore, the assumption that there is a smallest positive rational number must be false.

    Conclusion: There is no smallest positive rational number.

    Example 3: Proving 3\sqrt{3}3​ is Irrational (Another Classic Proof)

    Statement: Prove that 3\sqrt{3}3​ is irrational.

    Proof (by contradiction):

    1. Assume the opposite: Suppose 3\sqrt{3}3​ is rational. This means 3=pq\sqrt{3} = \frac{p}{q}3​=qp​, where ppp and qqq are integers and q≠0q \neq 0q=0, with ppp and qqq having no common factors (i.e., the fraction is in its simplest form).

    2. Square both sides:

      3=p2q2⇒p2=3q23 = \frac{p^2}{q^2} \quad \Rightarrow \quad p^2 = 3q^23=q2p2​⇒p2=3q2

      This shows that p2p^2p2 is divisible by 3, meaning ppp is divisible by 3 (since 3 is a prime number, if p2p^2p2 is divisible by 3, so is ppp).

    3. Therefore, p=3kp = 3kp=3k for some integer kkk.

    4. Substitute p=3kp = 3kp=3k into the equation p2=3q2p^2 = 3q^2p2=3q2:

      (3k)2=3q2⇒9k2=3q2⇒3k2=q2(3k)^2 = 3q^2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad 9k^2 = 3q^2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad 3k^2 = q^2(3k)2=3q2⇒9k2=3q2⇒3k2=q2

      This shows that q2q^2q2 is divisible by 3, so qqq must also be divisible by 3.

    5. But this contradicts our assumption that ppp and qqq have no common factors, because we have shown that both ppp and qqq are divisible by 3.

    6. Therefore, our assumption that 3\sqrt{3}3​ is rational must be false.

    Conclusion: 3\sqrt{3}3​ is irrational.

    Summary of Proof by Contradiction

    • Proof by contradiction is a powerful method where we assume the negation of the statement we want to prove and show that this assumption leads to an absurdity or contradiction.
    • The contradiction implies that the assumption is false, and therefore, the original statement must be true.
    • This method is especially useful when proving statements that are difficult to prove directly, such as the irrationality of numbers or properties involving the existence of certain objects.
    Previous topic 2
    Direct Proofs
    Next topic 4
    Sets

    Past Papers

    Open this section to load past papers

    Click on Show Past Papers to see past papers.
    On This Page
      Reading Stats
      Est. reading time8 min
      Word count1,338
      Code examples0
      DifficultyIntermediate