Skip to content

Mathematics · Ch 6 — Application of Derivatives

What is a Proof?

What is a Proof?

What is a Proof?

A proof is a sequence of statements, each justified by a definition, an axiom, or a previously established proposition, using only allowed logical rules. Every proof is a chain of deductive arguments. Proofs are of two main types:

  • Direct Proof – starts directly from what is given in the proposition.
  • Indirect Proof – proves an equivalent proposition instead of the original one.

Direct Proof

Begin with the given hypothesis and apply a chain of logical arguments — using axioms, definitions, and already proved theorems — to reach the conclusion.

(i) Straightforward Approach

A direct chain of arguments from the given assumption to the conclusion.

Example: Show that if x2−5x+6=0x^2 - 5x + 6 = 0, then x=3x = 3 or x=2x = 2.

  • Given x2−5x+6=0x^2 - 5x + 6 = 0, factor: (x−3)(x−2)=0(x - 3)(x - 2) = 0.
  • Using ab=0⇒a=0ab = 0 \Rightarrow a = 0 or b=0b = 0 (for a,b∈Ra, b \in \mathbb{R}): x−3=0x - 3 = 0 or x−2=0x - 2 = 0.
  • Hence x=3x = 3 or x=2x = 2.

Symbolic form: starting with pp, we deduce p⇒r⇒s⇒⋯⇒qp \Rightarrow r \Rightarrow s \Rightarrow \dots \Rightarrow q, proving p⇒qp \Rightarrow q.

Example: Prove f:R→Rf : \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R} defined by f(x)=2x+5f(x) = 2x + 5 is one-one.

  • A function is one-one if f(x1)=f(x2)⇒x1=x2f(x_1) = f(x_2) \Rightarrow x_1 = x_2.
  • 2x1+5=2x2+5⇒2x1=2x2⇒x1=x22x_1 + 5 = 2x_2 + 5 \Rightarrow 2x_1 = 2x_2 \Rightarrow x_1 = x_2. Hence the function is one-one.
(ii) Mathematical Induction

Based on the axiom: for a subset SS of N\mathbb{N}, if 1∈S1 \in S and k+1∈Sk + 1 \in S whenever k∈Sk \in S, then S=NS = \mathbb{N}.

Principle of Mathematical Induction: if S(n)S(n) is true for n=1n = 1 (or some starting point jj), and S(k)⇒S(k+1)S(k) \Rightarrow S(k+1) for all k≥jk \geq j, then S(n)S(n) is true for all n≥jn \geq j.

Example: Show that if A=[cos⁡θsin⁡θ−sin⁡θcos⁡θ]A = \begin{bmatrix} \cos\theta & \sin\theta \\ -\sin\theta & \cos\theta \end{bmatrix}, then An=[cos⁡nθsin⁡nθ−sin⁡nθcos⁡nθ]A^n = \begin{bmatrix} \cos n\theta & \sin n\theta \\ -\sin n\theta & \cos n\theta \end{bmatrix}.

  • Base case P(1)P(1): A1=[cos⁡θsin⁡θ−sin⁡θcos⁡θ]A^1 = \begin{bmatrix} \cos\theta & \sin\theta \\ -\sin\theta & \cos\theta \end{bmatrix} is true.
  • Inductive step: assume P(k)P(k): Ak=[cos⁡kθsin⁡kθ−sin⁡kθcos⁡kθ]A^k = \begin{bmatrix} \cos k\theta & \sin k\theta \\ -\sin k\theta & \cos k\theta \end{bmatrix}. Then

Ak+1=Ak⋅A=[cos⁡kθsin⁡kθ−sin⁡kθcos⁡kθ][cos⁡θsin⁡θ−sin⁡θcos⁡θ].A^{k+1} = A^k \cdot A = \begin{bmatrix} \cos k\theta & \sin k\theta \\ -\sin k\theta & \cos k\theta \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} \cos\theta & \sin\theta \\ -\sin\theta & \cos\theta \end{bmatrix}.

  • Multiplying and applying the angle-sum identities gives

Ak+1=[cos⁡(k+1)θsin⁡(k+1)θ−sin⁡(k+1)θcos⁡(k+1)θ],A^{k+1} = \begin{bmatrix} \cos(k+1)\theta & \sin(k+1)\theta \\ -\sin(k+1)\theta & \cos(k+1)\theta \end{bmatrix},

so P(k+1)P(k+1) is true. By induction, P(n)P(n) is true for all n≥1n \geq 1.

(iii) Proof by Cases (Exhaustion)

When the hypothesis pp splits into cases p=r∨s∨tp = r \lor s \lor t (where ∨\lor means "OR"), prove each case leads to the conclusion qq. If r⇒qr \Rightarrow q, s⇒qs \Rightarrow q, and t⇒qt \Rightarrow q, then (r∨s∨t)⇒q(r \lor s \lor t) \Rightarrow q, so p⇒qp \Rightarrow q.

Example: Show that in any triangle ABCABC, a=bcos⁡C+ccos⁡Ba = b \cos C + c \cos B.

  • Case 1 (∠C\angle C acute): BD=ccos⁡BBD = c \cos B and CD=bcos⁡CCD = b \cos C, so a=BD+CD=ccos⁡B+bcos⁡Ca = BD + CD = c \cos B + b \cos C.
  • Case 2 (∠C\angle C obtuse): BD=ccos⁡BBD = c \cos B and CD=−bcos⁡CCD = -b \cos C (since cos⁡(180∘−C)=−cos⁡C\cos(180^\circ - C) = -\cos C), so a=BD−CD=ccos⁡B+bcos⁡Ca = BD - CD = c \cos B + b \cos C.
  • Case 3 (∠C\angle C right angle): a=ccos⁡Ba = c \cos B and bcos⁡C=bcos⁡90∘=0b \cos C = b \cos 90^\circ = 0, so a=bcos⁡C+ccos⁡Ba = b \cos C + c \cos B.

All three cases give the same result, so the statement holds for any triangle.


Indirect Proof

Instead of proving p⇒qp \Rightarrow q directly, we prove an equivalent proposition.

(i) Proof by Contradiction (Reductio Ad Absurdum)

Assume the given statement is false; deriving a contradiction shows the assumption is wrong, so the original statement is true.

Example: Show that the set of all prime numbers is infinite.

  • Assume the primes are finite: P1,P2,P3,…,PkP_1, P_2, P_3, \dots, P_k. Consider N=(P1P2P3…Pk)+1N = (P_1 P_2 P_3 \dots P_k) + 1.
  • If NN is prime, it is a prime not in the list. If NN is composite, its prime divisor cannot be any listed prime (each leaves remainder 11).
  • Both cases contradict the assumption, so the set of primes is infinite.
(ii) Proof Using Contrapositive

Instead of proving p⇒qp \Rightarrow q, prove its contrapositive ∼q⇒∼p\sim q \Rightarrow \sim p (formed by interchanging and negating hypothesis and conclusion).

Example: Prove f(x)=2x+5f(x) = 2x + 5 is one-one using the contrapositive.

  • Contrapositive: x1≠x2⇒f(x1)≠f(x2)x_1 \neq x_2 \Rightarrow f(x_1) \neq f(x_2). …