Difference between mentioning existential quantifier and not
$begingroup$
Let $n in N$, Is there a difference between:
1) let us assume as true $exists k in Z / n= 9 k$ and
2) let us assume as true $ n = 9k / k in Z$?
quantifiers
asked Nov 13 '18 at 14:56
J.MohJ.Moh
395
$endgroup$
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Let $n in N$, Is there a difference between:
1) let us assume as true $exists k in Z / n= 9 k$ and
2) let us assume as true $ n = 9k / k in Z$?
quantifiers
asked Nov 13 '18 at 14:56
J.MohJ.Moh
395
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Yes: the second one can be read as : $forall k (x=9k)$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:11
$begingroup$
What difference would it make in case of induction?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:28
1
$begingroup$
$∃k (n=9k)$ and $∀k(x=9k)$ are two different statements, with different meanings, irrespective of the contexts where we used them.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:45
$begingroup$
Is there a way to prove the difference?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:50
1
$begingroup$
To prove the difference between "$(n=9k)$ for some $k$" and "$(n=9k)$ for every $k$" ? Try with $n=18$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:53
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Let $n in N$, Is there a difference between:
1) let us assume as true $exists k in Z / n= 9 k$ and
2) let us assume as true $ n = 9k / k in Z$?
quantifiers
asked Nov 13 '18 at 14:56
J.MohJ.Moh
395
$endgroup$
Let $n in N$, Is there a difference between:
1) let us assume as true $exists k in Z / n= 9 k$ and
2) let us assume as true $ n = 9k / k in Z$?
quantifiers
quantifiers
asked Nov 13 '18 at 14:56
J.MohJ.Moh
395
asked Nov 13 '18 at 14:56
J.MohJ.Moh
395
edited Nov 13 '18 at 15:12
J.Moh
asked Nov 13 '18 at 14:56
J.MohJ.Moh
395
asked Nov 13 '18 at 14:56
J.MohJ.Moh
395
asked Nov 13 '18 at 14:56
J.MohJ.Moh
395
395
$begingroup$
Yes: the second one can be read as : $forall k (x=9k)$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:11
$begingroup$
What difference would it make in case of induction?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:28
1
$begingroup$
$∃k (n=9k)$ and $∀k(x=9k)$ are two different statements, with different meanings, irrespective of the contexts where we used them.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:45
$begingroup$
Is there a way to prove the difference?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:50
1
$begingroup$
To prove the difference between "$(n=9k)$ for some $k$" and "$(n=9k)$ for every $k$" ? Try with $n=18$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:53
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Yes: the second one can be read as : $forall k (x=9k)$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:11
$begingroup$
What difference would it make in case of induction?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:28
1
$begingroup$
$∃k (n=9k)$ and $∀k(x=9k)$ are two different statements, with different meanings, irrespective of the contexts where we used them.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:45
$begingroup$
Is there a way to prove the difference?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:50
1
$begingroup$
To prove the difference between "$(n=9k)$ for some $k$" and "$(n=9k)$ for every $k$" ? Try with $n=18$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:53
$begingroup$
Yes: the second one can be read as : $forall k (x=9k)$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:11
$begingroup$
Yes: the second one can be read as : $forall k (x=9k)$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:11
$begingroup$
What difference would it make in case of induction?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:28
$begingroup$
What difference would it make in case of induction?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:28
1
1
$begingroup$
$∃k (n=9k)$ and $∀k(x=9k)$ are two different statements, with different meanings, irrespective of the contexts where we used them.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:45
$begingroup$
$∃k (n=9k)$ and $∀k(x=9k)$ are two different statements, with different meanings, irrespective of the contexts where we used them.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:45
$begingroup$
Is there a way to prove the difference?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:50
$begingroup$
Is there a way to prove the difference?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:50
1
1
$begingroup$
To prove the difference between "$(n=9k)$ for some $k$" and "$(n=9k)$ for every $k$" ? Try with $n=18$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:53
$begingroup$
To prove the difference between "$(n=9k)$ for some $k$" and "$(n=9k)$ for every $k$" ? Try with $n=18$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:53
|
show 2 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You appear to be using a nonstandard notation with this "/" symbol. For instance, it is not listed as a logical symbol in Wikipedia, which only lists it as a division or quotient operator, and every other source I could find with a simple Google search revealed the same usage. Anecdotally, this is consistent with my experience as a student of math: the statements that you've written in the question (and in the Nov. 19 comment) parse as invalid.
However, I am going to exercise some judgement here. It seems reasonable to assume that this symbol roughly means "such that":
(1) Let us assume as true $exists kinBbb Z$ such that $n=9k$.
(2) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ such that $kinBbb Z$.
The second statement still reads a little awkward to me; if I came across it in a research article I would assume it meant
(2*) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, (1) and (2*) read to me as the same statement. However, both of these are different from another reasonable interpretation of (2):
(2^) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for all $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, as Mauro mentioned in the comments, (2^) is different from (1), because, for instance: if $n=18$ then $n=9k$ only for $k=2$, but there are other numbers $kinBbb Z$ besides $2$, for which $n=9k$ is not true.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 4:54
aleph_twoaleph_two
24912
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
If this answers your question, please upvote or give it "best answer" so that it will be removed from the Unanswered Questions list. If not, please edit your question to use more standard notation.
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 19 '18 at 4:55
$begingroup$
That / is meant to mean "for"
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Dec 19 '18 at 7:34
$begingroup$
@J.Moh: Hmm, okay. In that case the first sentence strikes me as pretty strange: "There exists $kinBbb Z$ for $n=9k$."? I'm not totally sure why this reads badly to me but my guess is: "X for Y" should be interchangeable with "For Y, [we have] X". But if try that with (1), then you reference $k$ before defining it!
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 20 '18 at 4:18
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2996828%2fdifference-between-mentioning-existential-quantifier-and-not%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You appear to be using a nonstandard notation with this "/" symbol. For instance, it is not listed as a logical symbol in Wikipedia, which only lists it as a division or quotient operator, and every other source I could find with a simple Google search revealed the same usage. Anecdotally, this is consistent with my experience as a student of math: the statements that you've written in the question (and in the Nov. 19 comment) parse as invalid.
However, I am going to exercise some judgement here. It seems reasonable to assume that this symbol roughly means "such that":
(1) Let us assume as true $exists kinBbb Z$ such that $n=9k$.
(2) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ such that $kinBbb Z$.
The second statement still reads a little awkward to me; if I came across it in a research article I would assume it meant
(2*) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, (1) and (2*) read to me as the same statement. However, both of these are different from another reasonable interpretation of (2):
(2^) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for all $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, as Mauro mentioned in the comments, (2^) is different from (1), because, for instance: if $n=18$ then $n=9k$ only for $k=2$, but there are other numbers $kinBbb Z$ besides $2$, for which $n=9k$ is not true.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 4:54
aleph_twoaleph_two
24912
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
If this answers your question, please upvote or give it "best answer" so that it will be removed from the Unanswered Questions list. If not, please edit your question to use more standard notation.
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 19 '18 at 4:55
$begingroup$
That / is meant to mean "for"
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Dec 19 '18 at 7:34
$begingroup$
@J.Moh: Hmm, okay. In that case the first sentence strikes me as pretty strange: "There exists $kinBbb Z$ for $n=9k$."? I'm not totally sure why this reads badly to me but my guess is: "X for Y" should be interchangeable with "For Y, [we have] X". But if try that with (1), then you reference $k$ before defining it!
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 20 '18 at 4:18
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You appear to be using a nonstandard notation with this "/" symbol. For instance, it is not listed as a logical symbol in Wikipedia, which only lists it as a division or quotient operator, and every other source I could find with a simple Google search revealed the same usage. Anecdotally, this is consistent with my experience as a student of math: the statements that you've written in the question (and in the Nov. 19 comment) parse as invalid.
However, I am going to exercise some judgement here. It seems reasonable to assume that this symbol roughly means "such that":
(1) Let us assume as true $exists kinBbb Z$ such that $n=9k$.
(2) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ such that $kinBbb Z$.
The second statement still reads a little awkward to me; if I came across it in a research article I would assume it meant
(2*) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, (1) and (2*) read to me as the same statement. However, both of these are different from another reasonable interpretation of (2):
(2^) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for all $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, as Mauro mentioned in the comments, (2^) is different from (1), because, for instance: if $n=18$ then $n=9k$ only for $k=2$, but there are other numbers $kinBbb Z$ besides $2$, for which $n=9k$ is not true.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 4:54
aleph_twoaleph_two
24912
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
If this answers your question, please upvote or give it "best answer" so that it will be removed from the Unanswered Questions list. If not, please edit your question to use more standard notation.
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 19 '18 at 4:55
$begingroup$
That / is meant to mean "for"
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Dec 19 '18 at 7:34
$begingroup$
@J.Moh: Hmm, okay. In that case the first sentence strikes me as pretty strange: "There exists $kinBbb Z$ for $n=9k$."? I'm not totally sure why this reads badly to me but my guess is: "X for Y" should be interchangeable with "For Y, [we have] X". But if try that with (1), then you reference $k$ before defining it!
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 20 '18 at 4:18
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You appear to be using a nonstandard notation with this "/" symbol. For instance, it is not listed as a logical symbol in Wikipedia, which only lists it as a division or quotient operator, and every other source I could find with a simple Google search revealed the same usage. Anecdotally, this is consistent with my experience as a student of math: the statements that you've written in the question (and in the Nov. 19 comment) parse as invalid.
However, I am going to exercise some judgement here. It seems reasonable to assume that this symbol roughly means "such that":
(1) Let us assume as true $exists kinBbb Z$ such that $n=9k$.
(2) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ such that $kinBbb Z$.
The second statement still reads a little awkward to me; if I came across it in a research article I would assume it meant
(2*) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, (1) and (2*) read to me as the same statement. However, both of these are different from another reasonable interpretation of (2):
(2^) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for all $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, as Mauro mentioned in the comments, (2^) is different from (1), because, for instance: if $n=18$ then $n=9k$ only for $k=2$, but there are other numbers $kinBbb Z$ besides $2$, for which $n=9k$ is not true.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 4:54
aleph_twoaleph_two
24912
$endgroup$
You appear to be using a nonstandard notation with this "/" symbol. For instance, it is not listed as a logical symbol in Wikipedia, which only lists it as a division or quotient operator, and every other source I could find with a simple Google search revealed the same usage. Anecdotally, this is consistent with my experience as a student of math: the statements that you've written in the question (and in the Nov. 19 comment) parse as invalid.
However, I am going to exercise some judgement here. It seems reasonable to assume that this symbol roughly means "such that":
(1) Let us assume as true $exists kinBbb Z$ such that $n=9k$.
(2) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ such that $kinBbb Z$.
The second statement still reads a little awkward to me; if I came across it in a research article I would assume it meant
(2*) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, (1) and (2*) read to me as the same statement. However, both of these are different from another reasonable interpretation of (2):
(2^) Let us assume as true $n=9k$ for all $kinBbb Z$.
In this case, as Mauro mentioned in the comments, (2^) is different from (1), because, for instance: if $n=18$ then $n=9k$ only for $k=2$, but there are other numbers $kinBbb Z$ besides $2$, for which $n=9k$ is not true.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 4:54
aleph_twoaleph_two
24912
answered Dec 19 '18 at 4:54
aleph_twoaleph_two
24912
answered Dec 19 '18 at 4:54
aleph_twoaleph_two
24912
answered Dec 19 '18 at 4:54
aleph_twoaleph_two
24912
24912
1
$begingroup$
If this answers your question, please upvote or give it "best answer" so that it will be removed from the Unanswered Questions list. If not, please edit your question to use more standard notation.
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 19 '18 at 4:55
$begingroup$
That / is meant to mean "for"
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Dec 19 '18 at 7:34
$begingroup$
@J.Moh: Hmm, okay. In that case the first sentence strikes me as pretty strange: "There exists $kinBbb Z$ for $n=9k$."? I'm not totally sure why this reads badly to me but my guess is: "X for Y" should be interchangeable with "For Y, [we have] X". But if try that with (1), then you reference $k$ before defining it!
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 20 '18 at 4:18
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
If this answers your question, please upvote or give it "best answer" so that it will be removed from the Unanswered Questions list. If not, please edit your question to use more standard notation.
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 19 '18 at 4:55
$begingroup$
That / is meant to mean "for"
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Dec 19 '18 at 7:34
$begingroup$
@J.Moh: Hmm, okay. In that case the first sentence strikes me as pretty strange: "There exists $kinBbb Z$ for $n=9k$."? I'm not totally sure why this reads badly to me but my guess is: "X for Y" should be interchangeable with "For Y, [we have] X". But if try that with (1), then you reference $k$ before defining it!
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 20 '18 at 4:18
1
1
$begingroup$
If this answers your question, please upvote or give it "best answer" so that it will be removed from the Unanswered Questions list. If not, please edit your question to use more standard notation.
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 19 '18 at 4:55
$begingroup$
If this answers your question, please upvote or give it "best answer" so that it will be removed from the Unanswered Questions list. If not, please edit your question to use more standard notation.
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 19 '18 at 4:55
$begingroup$
That / is meant to mean "for"
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Dec 19 '18 at 7:34
$begingroup$
That / is meant to mean "for"
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Dec 19 '18 at 7:34
$begingroup$
@J.Moh: Hmm, okay. In that case the first sentence strikes me as pretty strange: "There exists $kinBbb Z$ for $n=9k$."? I'm not totally sure why this reads badly to me but my guess is: "X for Y" should be interchangeable with "For Y, [we have] X". But if try that with (1), then you reference $k$ before defining it!
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 20 '18 at 4:18
$begingroup$
@J.Moh: Hmm, okay. In that case the first sentence strikes me as pretty strange: "There exists $kinBbb Z$ for $n=9k$."? I'm not totally sure why this reads badly to me but my guess is: "X for Y" should be interchangeable with "For Y, [we have] X". But if try that with (1), then you reference $k$ before defining it!
$endgroup$
– aleph_two
Dec 20 '18 at 4:18
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2996828%2fdifference-between-mentioning-existential-quantifier-and-not%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Yes: the second one can be read as : $forall k (x=9k)$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:11
$begingroup$
What difference would it make in case of induction?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:28
1
$begingroup$
$∃k (n=9k)$ and $∀k(x=9k)$ are two different statements, with different meanings, irrespective of the contexts where we used them.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:45
$begingroup$
Is there a way to prove the difference?
$endgroup$
– J.Moh
Nov 13 '18 at 15:50
1
$begingroup$
To prove the difference between "$(n=9k)$ for some $k$" and "$(n=9k)$ for every $k$" ? Try with $n=18$.
$endgroup$
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Nov 13 '18 at 15:53