Chapter 17 ▶ Proof by contradiction

This method is based on the same principle as proof by contrapositive. Proof by contrapositive relies on the fact that if \(P\) always \(\Rightarrow Q\), then \(T\) implies \(S\). In a proof by contradiction, we assume that \(P\) and \(T\) are both true (e.g. \(a\) is an even integer and \(a^2\) is odd) then go looking for a contradiction. Because assuming \(P\) is fine (it’s the starting point for the conjecture), the contradiction must have arisen due to our other assumption, that of \(T\) being true.

Proof by contradiction is like building a fantasy world: one where both \(P\) and \(T\) can be true at the same time. We then explore this world (usually using algebra) until we find a contradiction, which shatters our illusions and the fantasy world collapses: \(P\) and \(T\) can’t both be true at the same time. If \(P\) and \(T\) can’t both be true simultaneously, and remembering our observation in the last chapter that every element on the left hand side of a conjecture map must travel to the right hand side, \(P\) must go to \(Q\).

Proof by contradiction is a great method - building this fantasy world and pretending all is OK until you find an irrefutable contradiction. It’s kind of like this…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gn5kuDdeGzs

17.1 Steps

  1. Assume \(P\) and \(T\).
  2. Go exploring within this fantasy world.
  3. When you come up against a contradiction (something that is blatantly impossible), you’re forced to conclude that your only assumption (that \(T\) can be true whilst \(P\) is true) has to be rejected. \(P \nRightarrow T\) and so, as the elements in \(P\) must go somewhere, \(P \Rightarrow Q\).

17.2 Formal definition

If \(P \nRightarrow T\), then \(P \Rightarrow Q\).

17.3 Conjectures


Solutions:


Conjecture 17.1: First, we rewrite the conjecture,

If \(a,b\) are consecutive integers, then \(a+b\) is odd.

To prove this using a direct proof would require us to consider two cases: firstly where the lower of the two integers is even, and then where the lower of the two integers is odd.

Let’s try a proof by contradiction. To attempt a proof by contradiction, we draw the map for the conjecture, to correctly identify \(P\) and \(T\):

Conclusion: Assuming \(T\) is true when \(P\) is true has led to a contradiction, and thus \(T\) can’t be true when \(P\) is true. If \(T\) can’t be true when \(P\) is true, but the elements of \(P\) must travel to right-hand side of the map, then they must all travel to \(Q\). We have proved \(P \Rightarrow Q\) for every element in \(P\).


Conjecture 17.2: We again draw the map for the conjecture, so as to correctly identify \(P\) and \(T\):

Conclusion: Assuming \(T\) is true when \(P\) is true has led to a contradiction, and thus \(T\) can’t be true when \(P\) is true. If \(T\) can’t be true when \(P\) is true, but the elements of \(P\) must travel to right-hand side of the map, then they must all travel to \(Q\). We have proved \(P \Rightarrow Q\) for every element in \(P\).


Conjecture 17.3: First, we rewrite the conjecture,

If \(a = \sqrt{2}\), then \(a\) is irrational.

The trouble with trying to prove this using a direct proof is the same reason Conjecture 16.4 was difficult to prove using a direct proof: we don’t have an algebraic way to express the family of irrational numbers. As we have an algebraic way to express the family of rational numbers,50 a proof by contradiction is probably going to be a lot easier than a direct proof of \(P \Rightarrow Q\).

We again draw the map for the conjecture, so as to correctly identify \(P\) and \(T\):

Conclusion: Assuming \(T\) is true when \(P\) is true has led to a contradiction, and thus \(T\) can’t be true when \(P\) is true. If \(T\) can’t be true when \(P\) is true, but the elements of \(P\) must travel to right-hand side of the map, then they must all travel to \(Q\). We have proved \(P \Rightarrow Q\) for every element in \(P\).


Conjecture 17.4: It is very easy to prove this conjecture using a direct proof. However, we’ll use a proof by contradiction to practice the method.

We again draw the map for the conjecture, so as to correctly identify \(P\) and \(T\):

Conclusion: Assuming \(T\) is true when \(P\) is true has led to a contradiction, and thus \(T\) can’t be true when \(P\) is true. If \(T\) can’t be true when \(P\) is true, but the elements of \(P\) must travel to right-hand side of the map, then they must all travel to \(Q\). We have proved \(P \Rightarrow Q\) for every element in \(P\).


17.4 Methods of contradiction and contrapositive

At the beginning of this chapter, I said that proof by contradiction is based on the same principle as proof by contrapositive. In fact, these two methods share the exact same DNA.

In fact, many proofs by contrapositive are found by a proof by contradiction: you show that by assuming \(P\) and \(T\) can both be true, a contradiction is reached. The proof is then rewritten in the form \(T \Rightarrow S\).


  1. Again, see https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQZLBbHTEunXLfb_ylj08CVcDncvXdnumcJ8rDGWSa1bwGRr-UYSU2eyubpwifi548abUJyAqXSOghN/pub.↩︎

  2. For example \(\frac{120}{84} = \frac{60}{42} = \frac{30}{21} = \frac{10}{7}\), so \(k=10\), \(l=7\), and \(\frac{k}{l}\) can’t be simplied any further.↩︎

  3. A right triangle is a triangle containing a \(90^\text{o}\) angle.↩︎