Search results
Whenever we have a mathematical statement of the form $A \implies B$, we can always try to prove the contrapositive instead i.e. $\neg B \implies \neg A$. However, what I find interesting to think about is, when should this approach look promising?
In logic and mathematics, contraposition, or transposition, refers to the inference of going from a conditional statement into its logically equivalent contrapositive, and an associated proof method known as § Proof by contrapositive.
The contrapositive: if not Q then not P. The inverse: if not P then not Q. The converse: if Q then P. It turns out that the \original" and the \contrapositive" always have the same truth value as each other. Also, the \inverse" and the \converse" always have the same truth value as each other.
contrapositive: If \(m\) is not an odd number, then it is not a prime number. converse: If \(m\) is an odd number, then it is a prime number. inverse: If \(m\) is not a prime number, then it is not an odd number.
contrapositive ¬p → ¬q (not implies not q p) are two logically equivalent statements. In this method of proof, there is no contradiction to be found. Rather our aim is to show, usually through a direct argument, that the contrapositive statement is true. By logical equivalence this automatically assures us that the implication is also true.
Understand and be able to use mathematical logic in simple situations: The terms . true. and . false; The terms . and, or (meaning . inclusive or), not; Statements of the form: if A then B . A if B . A only if B . A if and only if B The . converse. of a statement; The . contrapositive. of a statement;
15 lip 2018 · The contrapositive of a statement negates the conclusion as well as the hypothesis. It is logically equivalent to the original statement asserted. Often it is easier to prove the contrapositive than the original statement.
