ScholarQuill logoScholarQuillUniversity Notes
My Semester
Explore Notes
Past Papers12 New
Video CoursesNew
Search
Settings
Study Tools
GPA/CGPA Calculator
Schedule & To-Do
Student Portal
Contact
Contact
ScholarQuill logo
My Semester
Explore Notes
Past Papers12 New
Video CoursesNew
Search
Settings
GPA/CGPA Calculator
Schedule & To-Do
Student Portal
Contact
ScholarQuill logoScholarQuillUniversity Notes
Study PortalCSI-303Proof By Contradiction
Ctrl + K
Login
Explore
Search
Semester
Papers
CGPA
    CSI-303

    Discrete Structures

    Progress0 / 21 done
    Topics21
    1Introduction to Logic and Proofs2Direct Proofs3Proof by Contradiction4Sets5Combinatorics6Sequences7Formal Logic8Propositional and Predicate Calculus9Methods of Proof10Mathematical Induction and Recursion11Loop Invariants12Relations and Functions13Pigeonhole Principle14Trees and Graphs15Elementary Number Theory16Optimization and Matching17Fundamental Structures18Functions19Relations (Recursions)20Cardinality and Countability21Probabilistic Methods
    8 min read
    Topic 3 of 21
    Topic Study Note Illustration
    03

    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...

    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 view and download past papers

    Click on Show Past Papers to load available exam papers.

    Reading Progress
    0%
    8mremaining
    1.3kwords
    Intermediatelevel
    On This Page

    No headings found

    Study Toolkit

    Subject Portal

    Discrete Structures