Crowdmark Homework #13

Proof Technique: Proof by Cases

Math 303 – Fall 2024

Statement: If two integers 𝑥 and 𝑦 have opposite parity, then 𝑥 − 3𝑦 is an odd integer.

Proof: Assume that 𝑥 and 𝑦 are two integers with opposite parity. We will prove this given
statement using a proof with two cases: 1) 𝑥 is an even integer and 𝑦 is an odd integer, and
2) 𝑥 is an odd integer and 𝑦 is an even integer.

Case 1: Assume 𝑥 is an even integer and 𝑦 is an odd integer. By definition of even and odd
integers, there are integers 𝑚 and 𝑛 such that 𝑥 = 2𝑚 and 𝑦 = 2𝑛 + 1. Then, observe that

𝑥 − 3𝑦 = 2𝑚 − 3(2𝑛 + 1) = 2(𝑚 − 3𝑛 − 2) + 1.

Since 𝑚 and 𝑛 are integers, 𝑚 − 3𝑛 − 2 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑥 − 3𝑦 = 2𝑎 + 1,

where 𝑎 = 𝑚 − 3𝑛 − 2. By definition of an odd integer, 𝑥 − 3𝑦 is an odd integer. We have
proved the given statement in case 1.

Case 2: Assume 𝑥 is an odd integer and 𝑦 is an even integer. By definition of odd and even
integers, there are integers 𝑖 and 𝑗 such that 𝑥 = 2𝑖 + 1 and 𝑦 = 2𝑗. Then, observe that

𝑥 − 3𝑦 = (2𝑖 + 1) − 3(2𝑗) = 2(𝑖 − 3𝑗) + 1.

Since 𝑚 and 𝑛 are integers, 𝑖 − 3𝑗 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑥 − 3𝑦 = 2𝑏 + 1, where

𝑏 = 𝑖 − 3𝑗. By definition of an odd integer, 𝑥 − 3𝑦 is an odd integer. We have proved the
given statement in case 2.

Therefore, in each case we have proved the given statement and hence we have proved the
given statement.
∎

Statement: If 𝑥 is an odd integer, then} 8|(𝑥 ! − 1).

Proof: Assume 𝑥 is an odd integer. By definition of an odd integer, there is an integer 𝑘 such
that 𝑥 = 2𝑘 + 1. Now since 𝑘 is any integer, 𝑘 is either an even or an odd integer. We will
prove the given statement using a proof by cases with two cases: 1) 𝑘 is an even integer
and 2) 𝑘 is an odd integer.

Case 1: Assume that 𝑘 is an even integer. By definition of an even integer, there is an integer
𝑚 such that 𝑘 = 2𝑚. Thus, 𝑥 = 2(2𝑚) + 1 = 4𝑚 + 1. Observe that

𝑥 ! − 1 = (4𝑚 + 1)! − 1 = 16𝑚! + 8𝑚 = 8(2𝑚! + 𝑚).

Since 𝑚 is an integer, 2𝑚! + 𝑚 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑥 ! − 1 = 8𝑞, where 𝑞 is the
integer 2𝑚! + 𝑚. Hence, by the definition of divides, 8|(𝑥 ! − 1). We have proved the given
statement in case 1.

Case 2: Assume that 𝑘 is an odd integer. By definition of an odd integer, there is an integer 𝑛
such that 𝑘 = 2𝑛 + 1. Thus, 𝑥 = 2(2𝑛 + 1) + 1 = 4𝑛 + 3. Observe that

𝑥 ! − 1 = (4𝑚 + 3)! − 1 = 16𝑚! + 24𝑚 + 8 = 8(2𝑚! + 3𝑚 + 1).

Since 𝑚 is an integer, 2𝑚! + 3𝑚 + 1 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑥 ! − 1 = 8𝑟, where 𝑟 is

the integer 2𝑚! + 3𝑚 + 1. Hence, by the definition of divides, 8|(𝑥 ! − 1). We have proved
the given statement in case 2.

We have proved the given statement in both cases and hence we have proved the given
statement.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #14
Proof Technique: Proof of the Contrapositive
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Statement: Let 𝑥 and 𝑦 be real numbers. If 𝑥 + 𝑦 is irrational, then 𝑥 is irrational or 𝑦 is

irrational.

Proof: We will prove the given statement using a proof of the contrapositive statement.
That is, we will prove the logical equivalent statement “If 𝑥 is rational and 𝑦 is rational, then
x+𝑦 is rational.

Assume that 𝑥 is rational and 𝑦 is rational. By the definition of a rational number there
" $
exists integers 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐, and 𝑑 such that 𝑥 = # and 𝑦 = %, where 𝑏, 𝑑 ≠ 0. We see that
𝑎 𝑐 𝑎𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐
𝑥+𝑦 = + = .
𝑏 𝑑 𝑏𝑑
&
Since 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐, and 𝑑 are integers, 𝑎𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐 and 𝑏𝑑 are integers, by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑥 + 𝑦 = '
where 𝑟 and 𝑠 are the integers 𝑎𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐 and 𝑏𝑑, respectively. By the definition of a rational
number, 𝑥 + 𝑦 is a rational number. Therefore, we have proved the contrapositive of the
given statement and hence the given statement.
∎

Statement: Suppose 𝑥 is a real number. If 𝑥 ( − 𝑥 > 0 then 𝑥 > −1.

Proof: We will prove the given statement using a proof of the contrapositive statement. That
is, we will prove the logical equivalent statement “If 𝑥 ≤ −1, then 𝑥 ( − 𝑥 ≤ 0.

Assume that 𝑥 ≤ −1. We will prove that 𝑥 ( − 𝑥 ≤ 0 using a proof by cases with 1) 𝑥 = −1
and 2) 𝑥 < −1.

Case 1: Assume that 𝑥 = −1. Then we see that 𝑥 ( − 𝑥 = (−1)( − (−1) = −1 + 1 = 0 ≤ 0.

We have proved in case 1 that 𝑥 ( − 𝑥 ≤ 0.

Case 2: Assume that 𝑥 < −1. Then, we see that 𝑥 = −1 < 0, 𝑥 − 1 < −2, < 0, and
𝑥 + 1 < 0. Since the product of three negative numbers is negative, we have that 𝑥 ( − 𝑥 =
𝑥(𝑥 − 1)(𝑥 + 1) < 0. We have proved in case 2 that 𝑥 ( − 𝑥 ≤ 0.

In both cases, we have proved that if 𝑥 ≤ −1, then 𝑥 ( − 𝑥 ≤ 0. Therefore, we have proved
the contrapositive of the given statement and hence the given statement.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #15
Proof Technique: Proof by Contradiciton
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Statement: Prove that for each real number 𝑥, (𝑥 + √2) is irrational or (−𝑥 + √2 ) is
irrational.

Proof: We will prove the given statement using a proof by contradiction. That is, we will
assume that the given statement is false and arrive at a contradiction. For the sake of a
contradiction assume that there is a real number 𝑥 such that (𝑥 + √2) and (−𝑥 + √2 ) are
rational numbers. By definition of rational numbers, there exists integers 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐, and 𝑑 with
" $
𝑏, 𝑑 ≠ 0 such that 𝑥 + √2 = # and −𝑥 + √2 = %. Observe that
𝑎 𝑐 𝑎𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐
2 √2 = E𝑥 + √2F + E−𝑥 + √2F = + = .
𝑏 𝑑 𝑏𝑑
&
Since 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐, and 𝑑 are integers, 𝑎𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐 and 𝑏𝑑 are integers by Fact 4.1. Thus, 2 √2 = '
&
where 𝑟 and 𝑠 are the integers 𝑎𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐 and 𝑏𝑑 and hence, √2 = !'. We see that since 𝑠 is an
integer, 2𝑠 is also an integer. By definition of a rational number, we have that √2 is a rational
number. We have arrived at a contradiction since we proved in class that √2 is an irrational
number. Therefore, we have proved using a proof by contradiction the assumption that the
negation of the given statement is true is a false assumption and hence the given
statement for each real number 𝑥, (𝑥 + √2) is irrational or (−𝑥 + √2 ) is irrational is true.
∎

Statement: Prove that for all positive real numbers 𝑥 and 𝑦,

G𝑥 + 𝑦 ≤ √𝑥 + G𝑦.

Proof: We will prove the given statement using a proof by contradiction. That is, we will
assume that the given statement is false and arrive at a contradiction. For the sake of a
contradiction assume that there are positive real numbers 𝑥 and 𝑦 such that G𝑥 + 𝑦 >
√𝑥 + G𝑦. Since the function 𝑓(𝑥) = 𝑥 ! is an increasing function (i.e., if 𝑎 < 𝑏 then 𝑓(𝑎) =
!
𝑎! < 𝑏 ! = 𝑓(𝑏)), we can square both sides of the inequality to obtain 𝑥 + 𝑦 > E√𝑥 + G𝑦F .
This simplifies to 𝑥 + 𝑦 = 𝑥 + 2√𝑥 G𝑦 + 𝑦, and after subtracting x and y from both sides, we
arrive at 0 > 2√𝑥G𝑦 = 2G𝑥𝑦. Dividing both sides of the inequality by 2, we have the
inequality 0 > G𝑥𝑦. We know since 𝑥 and 𝑦 are positive real numbers, √𝑥 > 0 and G𝑦 > 0.
Thus, G𝑥𝑦 > 0. We have arrived at a contradiction with the two conclusions that G𝑥𝑦 is
positive, and also negative. Therefore, we have proved with a proof by contradiction, that
the assumption that the negative of the given statement was true is a false assumption and
hence the given statement for all positive real numbers 𝑥 and 𝑦, G𝑥 + 𝑦 ≤ √𝑥 + G𝑦 is true.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #16
Proof Technique: Proof by Contradiction
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Statement: Prove that 𝑙𝑜𝑔! 5 is an irrational number.

Note: There are two different ways to prove this with one being a longer proof than the other if you
show all the details. We will prove it both ways for illustration.

Proof 1: We will prove the given statement using a proof by contradiction. That is, we will assume
the given statement is false and arrive at a contradiction. For the sake of contradiction, we will
assume that 𝑙𝑜𝑔! 5 is a rational number. By definition of a rational number, there are integers 𝑎 and 𝑏
such that
𝑎
𝑙𝑜𝑔! 5 = .
𝑏

Note that log ! 5 > 1 since writing 5 in the form 4" would require 𝑥 > 1. Thus, 𝑎 > 𝑏 > 0.
!
Converting this from logarithmic form to exponential form, we have that 4" = 5. Raising each side
to the 𝑏th power, we have 4# = 5$ . We will finish the proof by proving two claims.

Claim 1: 2%# is even.

Proof of the Claim: We can rewrite 2%# = 2(2%#&' ). We need to first show that 2%#&' is a positive
integer. Since 𝑎 and 𝑏. are integers and 𝑎 > 𝑏, we know that 𝑎 > 1. So, 2𝑎 > 2 and we can factor
our a 2 from 2%# . Thus, 2%# = 2𝑘 where 𝑘 is the integer 2%#&' . By the definition of an even integer,
we have proved that 2%# is an even integer.

Claim 2: 5$ is odd.

Proof of Claim 2: We know that 5 is an odd number. Also, 𝑏 is a positive integer. Thus, we can write
it as 2𝑛 + 1 where 𝑛 = 2. Then, using the Binomial Theorem, we have that 5$ = (2𝑛 + 1)$ is equal
to
𝑏 𝑏 𝑏 𝑏 𝑏
9 : (2𝑛)$ 1( + 9 : (2𝑛)$&' 1' + 9 : (2𝑛)$&% 1% + ⋯ + 9 : (2𝑛)' 1$&' + 9 : (2𝑛)( 1$ .
0 1 2 𝑏−1 𝑏
$($&')
We can simplify this to 2$ 𝑛$ + 𝑏2$&' 𝑛$&' + %
2$&% 𝑛$&% + ⋯ + 2𝑏𝑛 + 1. Note we can factor a
$($&')
2 from this expression to obtain 2 92$&' 𝑛$ + 𝑏2$&% 𝑛$&' + % 2$&, 𝑛$&% + ⋯ + 𝑏𝑛: + 1. Since
2, 𝑛, and the binomial coefficients are all integers, the expression inside the parenthesis is an integer.
Therefore, we have that 5$ = 2𝑝 + 1 where p is the integer
$($&')
𝑝 = 2$&' 𝑛$ + 𝑏2$&% 𝑛$&' + % 2$&, 𝑛$&% + ⋯ + 𝑏𝑛. Therefore, by definition of an odd integer,
5$ is odd.
Returning to the proof that log ! 5 is irrational by a proof by contradiction, we see that the equation
4# = 5$ says that and even integer is equal to an odd integer. We have arrived at a contradiction.
Therefore, we have arrived at a contradiction. Hence, the assumption that the given statement is false
was a false assumption and consequently the given statement is true.
∎
Proof 2: We will prove the given statement using a proof by contradiction. That is, we will assume
the given statement is false and arrive at a contradiction. For the sake of contradiction, we will
assume that 𝑙𝑜𝑔! 5 is a rational number. By definition of a rational number, there are integers 𝑎 and 𝑏
such that
𝑎
𝑙𝑜𝑔! 5 = .
𝑏

Note that log ! 5 > 1 since writing 5 in the form 4" would require 𝑥 > 1. Thus, 𝑎 > 𝑏 > 0.
!
Converting this from logarithmic form to exponential form, we have that 4" = 5. Raising each side
to the 𝑏th power, we have 4# = 5$ . We can rewite this equation as 2%# = 5$ . On the left side is the
prime factorization of a number as 2%# . On the right side is the prime factorization of the same
number as 5$ . This is a contradiction since the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic says that every
number can be factored into a product of primes to powers in one way up to order. Therefore, we
have arrived at a contradiction. Hence, the assumption that the given statement is false was a false
assumption and consequently the given statement is true.
∎

Statement: Suppose 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐 ∈ ℤ . Prove If 𝑎% + 𝑏 % = 𝑐 % , then 𝑎 or 𝑏 is even.

Proof: Assume that 𝑎, 𝑏, and 𝑐 are integers. We will prove the given statement using a proof by
contradiction. That is, we will assume the given statement is false and arrive at a contradiction. For
the sake of contradiction, we will assume that 𝑎% + 𝑏 % = 𝑐 % , and 𝑎 and 𝑏 are odd integers. By the
definition of an odd integer, there exists integers 𝑚 and 𝑛 such that 𝑎 = 2𝑚 + 1 and 𝑏 = 2𝑛 + 1.
Substituting these into the equation 𝑎% + 𝑏 % = 𝑐 % , we have

𝑐 % = (2𝑚 + 1)% + (2𝑛 + 1)%

= 4𝑚% + 4𝑚 + 4𝑛% + 4𝑛 + 2
= 2(2𝑚% + 2𝑚 + 2𝑛% + 2𝑛 + 1). (*)

Since 𝑚 and 𝑛 are integers, 2𝑚% + 2𝑚 + 2𝑛% + 2𝑛 + 1 is an integer. Thus, 𝑐 % = 2𝑞 where 𝑞 is the
integer 2𝑚% + 2𝑚 + 2𝑛% + 2𝑛 + 1. By definition of an odd integer, 𝑐 % is even. By the proof of the
statement, if 𝑐 % is even then 𝑐 is even, using a proof of the contrapositive, we can conclude that 𝑐 is
even. By the definition of an even integer, there is an integer 𝑗 such that 𝑐 = 2𝑗. Substituting this into
(*), we have (2𝑗)% = 4𝑗 % = 2(2𝑚% + 2𝑚 + 2𝑛% + 2𝑛 + 1) and hence 2𝑗 % = 2(𝑚% + 𝑚 + 𝑛% +
𝑛) + 1. Since 𝑗, 𝑚, and 𝑛 are integers, 𝑗 % and 𝑚% + 𝑚 + 𝑛% + 𝑛 is an integer. By the definition of an
even and odd integer, we have the left side of the equation 2𝑗 % = 2(𝑚% + 𝑚 + 𝑛% + 𝑛) + 1 is an
even integer and the right side is an odd integer. Since an even integer is not equal to an odd integer,
we have arrived at a contradiction. Hence, the assumption that the given statement is false was a false
assumption and consequently the given statement is true. Therefore, we have proved the statement “if
𝑎% + 𝑏 % = 𝑐 % , then 𝑎 or 𝑏 is even.”
∎
Crowdmark Homework #17
Proof Technique: Proof of a Biconditional Statement
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Statement: Let 𝑥 and 𝑦 be integers. Then 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ) if and only if 𝑥 and 𝑦 are of the same
parity.

Proof: We will prove the given biconditional statement by proving “if 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ) then 𝑥 and
𝑦 are of the same parity, and its converse.

We will first prove that if 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ) then 𝑥 and 𝑦 are of the same parity. We will prove this
statement using a proof by contradiction. That is, we will assume that the given statement
is false and prove that the negation is true. That is, we will assume that 4|𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! and 𝑥 and
𝑦 are of the opposite parity. We will prove the given conditional statement using a proof by
cases with the two cases: 1) 𝑥 is even and 𝑦 is odd and 2) 𝑥 is odd and 𝑦 is even.

Case 1: Assume that 𝑥 is even and 𝑦 is odd. By definition of an even and an odd integer,
there exists integers 𝑖 and 𝑗 such that 𝑥 = 2𝑖 and 𝑦 = 2𝑗 + 1. We see that

𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! = (2𝑖)! − (2𝑗 + 1)!

= 4𝑖 ! − (4𝑗 ! + 4𝑗 + 1)
= 4(𝑖 ! − 𝑗 ! − 𝑗 − 1) + 3.

Notice that 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! − 3 = 4(𝑖 ! − 𝑗 ! − 𝑗 − 1). Since 𝑖 and 𝑗 are integers, 𝑖 ! − 𝑗 ! − 𝑗 − 1 is an

integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! − 3 = 4𝑧, where 𝑧 is the integer 𝑖 ! − 𝑗 ! − 𝑗 − 1. By the
definition of divides, 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! − 3). By the definition of congruence modulo 4, 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ≡
3 (𝑚𝑜𝑑 4). However, we assumed that 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ) and by definition of congruence modulo
4, this says that 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ≡ 0 (𝑚𝑜𝑑 4). Therefore, we have arrived at a contradiction since
𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! cannot be congruent to both 0 and 3 modulo 4. Therefore, for case 1, we have
proved the given statement.

Case 2: Assume that 𝑥 is odd and 𝑦 is even. By definition of an odd and an even integer,
there exists integers 𝑢 and 𝑣 such that 𝑥 = 2𝑢 + 1 and 𝑦 = 2𝑣. We see that

𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! = (2𝑢 + 1)! − (2𝑣)!

= 4𝑢! + 4𝑢 + 1 − 4𝑣 !
= 4(𝑢! + 𝑢 − 𝑣 ! ) + 1.

Notice that 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! − 1 = 4(𝑢! + 𝑢 − 𝑣 ! ). Since 𝑢 and 𝑣 are integers, 𝑢! + 𝑢 − 𝑣 ! is an

integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! − 1 = 4𝑡, where 𝑡 is the integer 𝑢! + 𝑢 − 𝑣 ! . By the
definition of divides, 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! − 1). By the definition of congruence modulo 4, 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ≡
1 (𝑚𝑜𝑑 4). However, we assumed that 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ) and by definition of congruence modulo
4, this says that 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ≡ 0 (𝑚𝑜𝑑 4). Therefore, we have arrived at a contradiction since
𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! cannot be congruent to both 0 and 1 modulo 4. Therefore, for case 2, we have
proved the given statement.

In both cases, we have proved the given statement and therefore, we have proved the
conditional statement if 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ) then 𝑥 and 𝑦 are of the same parity.

We will now prove the converse statement, if 𝑥 and 𝑦 are of the same parity, then
4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ). We will prove this with a proof by cases with two cases: a) both 𝑥 and 𝑦 are
even and b) both 𝑥 and 𝑦 are odd.

Case a: Assume that 𝑥 and 𝑦 are even. By the definition of an even integer, there exists
integers 𝑒 and 𝑓 such that 𝑥 = 2𝑒 and 𝑦 = 2𝑓. We see that

𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! = 4𝑒 ! − 4𝑓 ! = 4(𝑒 ! − 𝑓 ! ).

Since 𝑒 and 𝑓 are integers, 𝑒 ! − 𝑓 ! is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! = 4𝑔, where 𝑔 is
the integer 𝑒 ! − 𝑓 ! . By the definition of divides, we have that 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ). In case a, we
have proved the converse statement.

Case b: Assume that 𝑥 and 𝑦 are odd. By the definition of an odd integer, there exists
integers 𝑤 and 𝑞 such that 𝑥 = 2𝑤 + 1 and 𝑦 = 2𝑞 + 1. We see that

𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! = (2𝑤 + 1)! − (2𝑞 + 1)! = 4𝑤 ! + 4𝑤 − 4𝑞! − 4𝑞 = 4(𝑤 ! + 𝑤 − 𝑞! − 𝑞).

Since 𝑤 and 𝑞 are integers, 𝑤 ! + 𝑤 − 𝑞! − 𝑞 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! = 4ℎ,

where ℎ is the integer 𝑤 ! + 𝑤 − 𝑞! − 𝑞. By the definition of divides, we have that 4|(𝑥 ! −
𝑦 ! ). In case b, we have proved the converse statement.

In both cases, we have proved that if 𝑥 and 𝑦 are of the same parity, then 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ).

Since we have proved the conditional statement if 4|(𝑥 ! − 𝑦 ! ) then 𝑥 and 𝑦 are of the same
parity and its converse, we have proved the given biconditional statement.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #18
Assessment of Proofs using the Contrapositive Statement
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Statement: A student in another introduction to proof class has proved the following
statement using a proof of the contrapositive statement.

Statement to Prove: Suppose 𝑚 is an integer. If 𝑚! is an odd integer, then 𝑚 is an odd

integer.

Grade the following proof shown below with the following grading scale.

A (correct): If the proof is correct, even if the proof is not the simplest or the proof you
would have given.

C (partially correct): If the proof is largely correct. The proof may contain one or two
incorrect statements or justifications, but the errors are easily correctable.

F (failure): if the main idea of the proof is incorrect, or there are too many errors.

You should provide justification for a grade of C or F, and explain what is incorrect and why.
It is not necessary to write a correct proof, but you can if you want.

Proof to Grade: We will prove the given statement using a proof of the contrapositive
statement. Assume 𝑚! is not odd. Then, 𝑚! is even and, by the definition of an even
integer, 𝑚! = 2𝑘 for some integer 𝑘. Thus, 2𝑘 is a perfect square. That is, √2𝑘 is an integer.

If √2𝑘 is odd, then √2𝑘 = 2𝑛 + 1 for some integer 𝑛, which means 𝑚! = 2𝑘 = (2𝑛 + 1)! =
4𝑛! + 4𝑛 + 1 = 2(2𝑛! + 2𝑛) + 1. Thus, 𝑚! is odd, contrary to our assumption. Therefore,
√2𝑘 = 𝑚 must be even. Hence, if 𝑚! is not odd, then 𝑚 is not odd. Consequently, we have
proved that if 𝑚! is odd then 𝑚 is odd.
∎

Assessment of the Proof: Grade of F. They state they will prove the contrapositive
statement but do not. The contrapositive of the given statement is “if 𝑚 is an even integer,
then 𝑚! is an even integer.” They should have started the proof out with assume 𝑚 is an
even integer and proved that 𝑚! is an even integer. However, they started the proof out with
assume 𝑚! is an even integer and proved 𝑚 is an even integer. This only would garner an F.
Statement: A student in another introduction to proof class has proved the following
statement.

Statement to Prove: Suppose 𝑡 is a real number. If 𝑡 is irrational, then 5𝑡 is irrational.

Grade the following proof shown below with the following grading scale.

A (correct): If the proof is correct, even if the proof is not the simplest or the proof you
would have given.

C (partially correct): If the proof is largely correct. The proof may contain one or two
incorrect statements or justifications, but the errors are easily correctable.

F (failure): if the main idea of the proof is incorrect, or there are too many errors.

You should provide justification for a grade of C or F, and explain what is incorrect and why.
It is not necessary to write a correct proof, but you can if you want.

Proof to grade: We will prove the given statement using a proof of the contrapositive
statement
)
Assume 5𝑡 is a rational number. Then, by Definition of a rational number, 5𝑡 = * where
)
𝑝 and 𝑞 are integers and 𝑞 ≠ 0. Thus, 𝑡 = +*, where 𝑝 and 5𝑞 are integers and 5𝑞 ≠ 0 since
𝑞 is a nonzero integer. Hence, 𝑡 is a rational number by the definition of a rational number.

Therefore, we have proved that if 𝑡 is irrational, then 5𝑡 is irrational.

∎
Assessment of Proof: Grade of an A.
Crowdmark Homework #19
Proof Technique: Existence Proofs
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Statement: Show that there are prime numbers 𝑝 and 𝑞 such that 𝑝 + 𝑞 = 128.

Proof: Consider prime number 𝑝 = 61 and 𝑞 = 67. We see that 𝑝 + 𝑞 = 61 + 67 = 128.

Therefore, we have proved that there are prime number 𝑝 and 𝑞 such that 𝑝 + 𝑞 = 128.
∎

Statement: Prove that there exist integers 𝑎, 𝑏, and 𝑑 𝑠uch that 𝑑 divides the product
𝑎𝑏 but 𝑑 does not divide 𝑎 and 𝑑 does not divide 𝑏.

Proof: Consider the integers 𝑎 = 3, 𝑏 = 16 and 𝑑 = 6. We see that 𝑑 = 6 divides 𝑎𝑏 = 48

since 48 = 6(8), but 𝑑 does not divide 𝑎 and 𝑑 does not divide 𝑏 since for all integers 𝑖 and
𝑗, 3 ≠ 6𝑖 and 16 ≠ 6𝑗. Therefore we have proved the given statement using this example.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #20
Proof Technique: Proof of the Contrapositive and Proof by Contradiction
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1

Statement: Use a proof of the contrapositive to prove the following statement.

Let 𝑝 be a prime number and 𝑎 and 𝑏 be integers. If 𝑝|(𝑎𝑏) then 𝑝|𝑎 or 𝑝|𝑏.

Proof 1: We will prove the given statement using a proof of the logically equivalent
contrapositive statement. That is, we will prove that if 𝑝 does not divide 𝑎 and 𝑝 does not
divide 𝑏, then 𝑝 does not divide 𝑎𝑏.

Assume that p is a prime number, 𝑝 does not divide 𝑎 and 𝑝 does not divide 𝑏. Then, using
the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic, the prime factorization of 𝑎 is given by 𝑎 =
- - -
𝑝, ! 𝑝! " ⋯ 𝑝. # , where 𝑝, , 𝑝! , … , 𝑝. are not the prime number 𝑝. Similarly, we have that 𝑏 =
/ / /
𝑞, ! 𝑞! " ⋯ 𝑞.# , where 𝑞, , 𝑞! , … , 𝑞. are not the prime number 𝑝. Thus,
- - - / / /
𝑎𝑏 = E𝑝, ! 𝑝! " ⋯ 𝑝. # , FE𝑞, ! 𝑞! " ⋯ 𝑞.# F
and we see that none of the 𝑝0 ’s and 𝑞1 ’s are 𝑝 for all 𝑖, 𝑗 = 1,2, … , 𝑛. That says that 𝑝 does
not divide 𝑎𝑏. We have proved the given statement using a proof of the logical equivalent
contrapositive statement and hence the given statement.
∎
Proof 2: We will prove the given statement using a proof of the logically equivalent
contrapositive statement. That is, we will prove that if 𝑝 does not divide 𝑎 and 𝑝 does not
divide 𝑏, then 𝑝 does not divide 𝑎𝑏.

Assume that p is a prime number, 𝑝 does not divide 𝑎 and 𝑝 does not divide 𝑏. We know by
the Division Algorithm, since 𝑝 does not divide 𝑎, there are integers 𝑞" and 𝑟" such that 𝑎 =
𝑝𝑞" + 𝑟" where 0 < 𝑟" < 𝑝. Similarly, since 𝑝 does not divide 𝑏, there are integers 𝑞# and 𝑟#
such that 𝑏 = 𝑝𝑞# + 𝑟# where 0 < 𝑟# < 𝑝. Now multiplying these two, we have that
𝑎𝑏 = (𝑝𝑞" + 𝑟" )(𝑝𝑞# + 𝑟# ) = 𝑝! 𝑞" 𝑞# + 𝑝𝑞" 𝑟# + 𝑝𝑞# 𝑟" + 𝑟" 𝑟#
= 𝑝(𝑝𝑞" 𝑞# + 𝑞" 𝑟# + 𝑞# 𝑟" ) + 𝑟" 𝑟# .
We know that 𝑟" , 𝑟# ≠ 0. Thus, 𝑟" 𝑟# ≠ 0. Also, we assumed that p is not a factor of 𝑟" and 𝑟# .
Thus, 𝑝 is not a factor of 𝑟" 𝑟# . Thus, we see that 𝑝 does not divide 𝑎𝑏 and we have proved
the logical equivalent contrapositive statement. Therefore, we have proved the given
statement.
∎
Problem 2

Statement: Use a proof by contradiction to prove the following statement:

Let 𝑝 be a prime number. The real number G𝑝 is irrational.

Proof: Assume that 𝑝 is a prime number. We will prove that the real number G𝑝 is irrational
by using a proof by contradiction. That is, we will assume that G𝑝 is rational and arrive at a
contradiction. Assume that G𝑝 is rational. By the definition of a rational number there
exists integers 𝑎 and 𝑏 such that
𝑎
G𝑝 = , (∗)
𝑏

where 𝑎 and 𝑏 have no common factors greater than 1 and 𝑏 ≠ 0. Squaring both sides of
""
(*), we have that 𝑝 = #" and multiplying by 𝑏 ! , we obtain 𝑝𝑏 ! = 𝑎! (∗∗). By the definition of
divides, since 𝑏 ! is an integer due to 𝑏 being an integer by Fact 4.1, we have that 𝑝|𝑎! . Using
problem 1 from this homework, we conclude that 𝑝|𝑎. By the definition of divides, there is
an integer 𝑘 such that 𝑎 = 𝑝𝑘. Substituting this into (∗∗), we have

𝑝𝑏 ! = (𝑝𝑘)! = 𝑝! 𝑘 ! .

Dividing both sides by 𝑝, we have that 𝑏 ! = 𝑝𝑘 ! . By the definition of divides, since 𝑘 ! is an

integer due to 𝑘 being an integer by Fact 4.1, we have that 𝑝|𝑏 ! . Using problem 1 from this
homework, we conclude that 𝑝|𝑏. We have arrived at a contradiction, since we assumed
that 𝑎 and 𝑏 were integers with no common factor greater than 1. Therefore, the given
assumption that G𝑝 is a rational number was a false assumption and hence the given
statement is true. Consequently, we have proved for any prime number 𝑝, G𝑝 is irrational.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #21
Proof Technique: Proof by Cases
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1

Statement: Let 𝑛 be an integer. Prove that 𝑛2 is in the form of either 5𝑘 or 5𝑘 + 1.

Proof: Assume 𝑛 is an integer. We will prove that 𝑛2 is in the form of either 5𝑘 or 5𝑘 + 1

using a proof by cases. Since 𝑛 is an integer, we can use the Division Algorithm with 𝑎 = 𝑛
and 𝑏 = 5 to obtain that there exist two integers 𝑞 and 𝑟 such that 𝑛 = 5𝑞 + 𝑟 where the
remainder satisfies 0 ≤ 𝑟 < 5. This gives us five cases: 1) 𝑛 = 5𝑞, 2) 𝑛 = 5𝑞 + 1, 3) 𝑛 =
5𝑞 + 2, 4) 𝑛 = 5𝑞 + 𝑟, and 5) 𝑛 = 5𝑞 + 4.

Before we start the proof by cases, we note that in general

𝑛2 = (5𝑞 + 𝑟)2 = 625𝑞2 + 500𝑞( 𝑟 + 150𝑞! 𝑟 ! + 20𝑞𝑟 ( + 𝑟 2 .

Case 1: Assume that 𝑛 = 5𝑞 for some integer 𝑞. Then we see that 𝑛2 = 625𝑞2 = 5(125𝑞2 ).
Since 𝑞 is an integer, 125𝑞2 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑛2 is in the form of 5𝑘 where 𝑘 is
the integer 125𝑞2 . Therefore, in this case, 𝑛2 is in the form of 5𝑘 and we have proved the
given statement.

Case 2: Assume that 𝑛 = 5𝑞 + 1 for some integer 𝑞. Then we see that 𝑛2 = 625𝑞2 +
500𝑞( + 150𝑞! + 20𝑞 + 1 = 5(125𝑞2 + 100𝑞( + 30𝑞! + 4𝑞) + 1. Since 𝑞 is an integer,
125𝑞2 + 100𝑞( + 30𝑞! + 4𝑞 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑛2 is in the form of 5𝑘 + 1
where 𝑘 is the integer 125𝑞2 + 100𝑞( + 30𝑞! + 4𝑞. Therefore, in this case, 𝑛2 is in the form
of 5𝑘 + 1 and we have proved the given statement.

Case 3: Assume that 𝑛 = 5𝑞 + 2 for some integer 𝑞. Then we see that 𝑛2 = 625𝑞2 +
1000𝑞( + 600𝑞! + 160𝑞 + 16 = 5(125𝑞2 + 200𝑞( + 120𝑞! + 32𝑞 + 3) + 1. Since 𝑞 is an
integer, 125𝑞2 + 200𝑞( + 120𝑞! + 32𝑞 + 3 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑛2 is in the form
of 5𝑘 + 1 where 𝑘 is the integer 125𝑞2 + 200𝑞( + 120𝑞! + 32𝑞 + 3. Therefore, in this case,
𝑛2 is in the form of 5𝑘 + 1 and we have proved the given statement.

Case 4: Assume that 𝑛 = 5𝑞 + 3 for some integer 𝑞. Then we see that 𝑛2 = 625𝑞2 +
1500𝑞( + 1350𝑞! + 540𝑞 + 81 = 5(125𝑞2 + 300𝑞( + 270𝑞! + 108𝑞 + 16) + 1. Since 𝑞 is
an integer, 125𝑞2 + 300𝑞( + 270𝑞! + 108𝑞 + 16 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑛2 is in the
form of 5𝑘 + 1 where 𝑘 is the integer 125𝑞2 + 300𝑞( + 270𝑞! + 108𝑞 + 16. Therefore, in
this case, 𝑛2 is in the form of 5𝑘 + 1 and we have proved the given statement.

Case 5: Assume that 𝑛 = 5𝑞 + 4 for some integer 𝑞. Then we see that 𝑛2 = 625𝑞2 +
2000𝑞( + 2400𝑞! + 1280𝑞 + 256 = 5(125𝑞2 + 400𝑞( + 480𝑞! + 256𝑞 + 51) + 1. Since 𝑞
is an integer, 125𝑞2 + 400𝑞( + 480𝑞! + 256𝑞 + 51 is an integer by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑛2 is in
the form of 5𝑘 + 1 where 𝑘 is the integer 125𝑞2 + 400𝑞( + 480𝑞! + 256𝑞 + 51. Therefore,
in this case, 𝑛2 is in the form of 5𝑘 + 1 and we have proved the given statement.

Therefore, for all cases, we have proved the given statement and hence 𝑛2 is in the form of
either 5𝑘 or 5𝑘 + 1.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #22
Proof Technique: Proof or Disproof
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1

Statement: Prove or disprove the following statement

If 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐 ∈ ℕ and 𝑎𝑏, 𝑏𝑐 and 𝑎𝑐 all have the same parity, then 𝑎, 𝑏 and 𝑐 all have the same
parity.

Disproof: Let 𝑎 = 2, 𝑏 = 1, and 𝑐 = 2. We see that 𝑎𝑏 = 2, 𝑏𝑐 = 2, and 𝑎𝑐 = 4 and hence

they have all the same parity. However, 𝑎, 𝑏 and 𝑐 do not have the same parity. Therefore,
we have disproved the given statement with this counterexample.
∎

Note: There are many di^erent counterexamples that can be used for this disproof.

Problem 2

Statement: Prove or disprove the following statement

For all integers 𝑎 and 𝑏, if 5|𝑎 or 5|𝑏, then 5|(5𝑎 + 𝑏).

Disproof: Let 𝑎 = 15 and 𝑏 = 7. We see that 5|𝑎 since 15 = 5(3). Since 5|𝑎, we have that
5|𝑎 or 5|𝑏 is true. Now notice that 5𝑎 + 𝑏 = 5(15) + 7 = 82 and 5 doesn’t divide 82.
Therefore, we have disproved the given statement with this counterexample.
∎

Note: There are many di^erent counterexamples that can be used for this disproof.
Crowdmark Homework #23
Proof Technique: Mathematical Induction
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1

Statement: Using mathematical induction, prove for every positive integer 𝑛 ≥ 1 that

𝑛(𝑛 + 1)(2𝑛 + 1)
1! + 2! + 3! + 4! + ⋯ + 𝑛! = .
6

Proof: We will prove the given statement by mathematical induction. Let 𝑃(𝑛) be 1! + 2! +
.(.4,)(!.4,)
3! + 4! + ⋯ + 𝑛! = 6
. We will first prove the base case and then the induction
statement in order to prove the given statement.

(Base Case): We see that 𝑃(1) is true since on the left-hand side we have 1! = 1 and on
,(,4,)(!(,)4,) ,(!)(()
the right-hand side we have 6
= 6
= 1. Hence, 𝑃(1) is true.

(Induction Step): Assume that 𝑃(𝑘) is true. That is, assume that
𝑘(𝑘 + 1)(2𝑘 + 1)
1! + 2! + 3! + 4! + ⋯ + 𝑘 ! =
6
Is true. We will prove that 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true. That is, we will prove that
(𝑘 + 1)(𝑘 + 2)(2𝑘 + 3)
1! + 2! + 3! + 4! + ⋯ + (𝑘 + 1)! = .
6

Starting with the left side of 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) we have,

𝑘(𝑘 + 1)(2𝑘 + 1)
(1! + 2! + 3! + 4! + ⋯ + 𝑘 ! ) + (𝑘 + 1)! = + (𝑘 + 1)^2
6
𝑘(𝑘 + 1)(2𝑘 + 1) 6(𝑘 + 1)^2
= +
6 6
𝑘(𝑘 + 1)(2𝑘 + 1) + 6(𝑘 + 1)!
=
6
(𝑘 + 1)[𝑘(2𝑘 + 1) + 6(𝑘 + 1)]
=
6
(𝑘 + 1)[2𝑘 ! + 7𝑘 + 6]
=
6
(𝑘 + 1)(𝑘 + 2)(2𝑘 + 3)
= .
6
Thus, we have proved that 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true and therefore proved the induction step that if
𝑃(𝑘) is true then 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true. Therefore, we have proved the given statement is true by
mathematical induction.
∎

Problem 2

Statement: Use mathematical induction to prove that for every integer 𝑛 ≥ 1,

3|(𝑛( + 5𝑛 + 6).

Proof: We will prove the given statement by mathematical induction. Let 𝑃(𝑛) be
3|(𝑛( + 5𝑛 + 6). We will first prove the base case and then the induction statement in
order to prove the given statement.

(Base Case): We see that 𝑃(1) is true since 1( + 5(1) + 6 = 12 and 3|12 (𝑖. 𝑒. , 12 = 3(4)).
Therefore, we have proved that 𝑃(1) is true.

(Induction Step): Assume that 𝑃(𝑘) is true for 𝑘 ≥ 1. That is, assume that 3|(𝑘 ( + 5𝑘 + 6).
This means that 𝑘 ( + 5𝑘 + 6 = 3𝑚 for some integer 𝑚. We will now prove that 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is
true. That is, we will prove that there exists an integer 𝑛 such that (𝑘 + 1)( + 5(𝑘 + 1) +
6 = 3𝑛. Starting with the left side of 𝑃(𝑘 + 1), we have

(𝑘 + 1)( + 5(𝑘 + 1) + 6 = 𝑘 ( + 3𝑘 ! + 3𝑘 + 1 + 5𝑘 + 5 + 6
= (𝑘 ( + 5𝑘 + 6) + 3𝑘 ! + 3𝑘 + 6
= 3𝑚 + 3(𝑘 ! + 𝑘 + 2)
= 3(𝑚 + 𝑘 ! + 𝑘 + 2).

Since 𝑚 and 𝑘 are integers, 𝑚 + 𝑘 ! + 𝑘 + 2 is also an integer by Fact 4.1. Hence,

(𝑘 + 1)( + 5(𝑘 + 1) + 6 = 3𝑛 where 𝑛 is the integer 𝑚 + 𝑘 ! + 𝑘 + 2. By the definition of
divides, we conclude that 3|((𝑘 + 1)( + 5(𝑘 + 1) + 6) and hence 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true.
Therefore, we have proved the induction step that if 𝑃(𝑘) is true then 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true.

Consequently, by mathematical induction, we have proved the given statement.

∎
Crowdmark Homework #24
Proof Technique: Mathematical Induction with a DiUerent Base Case
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1

Statement: Use mathematical induction to prove the following statement for each odd
integer with 𝑛 ≥ 3,

1 1 1 1 (−1).
`1 + a `1 − a `1 + a `1 − a ⋯ b1 + c = 1.
2 3 4 5 𝑛

Proof: We will prove the given statement by mathematical induction. Let 𝑃(𝑛) be
1 1 1 1 (−1).
`1 + a `1 − a `1 + a `1 − a ⋯ b1 + c = 1.
2 3 4 5 𝑛
We will first prove the base case and then the induction step in order to prove the given
statement.

, ,
(Base Case): We see that 𝑃(3) is true since on the left-hand side we have d1 + !e d1 − (e =
( !
d!e d(e = 1 which is equal to the right-hand side. Hence, 𝑃(3) is true.

(Induction Step): Assume that 𝑃(𝑘) is true. That is, assume that
1 1 1 1 (−1)7
`1 + a `1 − a `1 + a `1 − a ⋯ b1 + c = 1.
2 3 4 5 𝑘

is true. Since 𝑘 is an odd integer, the next odd integer will be 𝑘 + 2. Thus, we will prove that
𝑃(𝑘 + 2) is true. That is, we will prove that

1 1 1 1 (−1)74!
`1 + a `1 − a `1 + a `1 − a ⋯ b1 + c = 1.
2 3 4 5 𝑘+2

Therefore, we will prove the induction step that if 𝑃(𝑘) is true, then 𝑃(𝑘 + 2) is true. Since
𝑘 + 2 is odd, 𝑘 + 1 is even.

Starting with the left side of 𝑃(𝑘 + 2) and knowing 𝑃(𝑘) is true, we have,

1 1 1 1 (−1)7 (−1)74, (−1)74!

`1 + a `1 − a `1 + a `1 − a ⋯ b1 + c b1 + c b1 + c
2 3 4 5 𝑘 𝑘+1 𝑘+2
1 1 𝑘+2 𝑘+1
= (1) `1 + a `1 − a=` a` a = 1.
𝑘+1 𝑘+2 𝑘+1 𝑘+1
Thus, we have proved that 𝑃(𝑘 + 2) is true and therefore proved the induction step that if
𝑃(𝑘) is true then 𝑃(𝑘 + 2) is true.

Therefore, we have proved the given statement is true by mathematical induction.

∎

Problem 2

Statement: Use mathematical induction to prove that for each nonnegative integer,
8. |( 4𝑛)!

Proof: We will prove the given statement by mathematical induction. Let 𝑃(𝑛) be 8. |( 4𝑛)!
for 𝑛 ≥ 0. We will first prove the base case and then the induction statement to prove the
given statement.

(Base Case): We see that 𝑃(0) is true since E4(0)F! = 0! = 1, 88 = 1, and 1|1. Therefore,
we have proved that 𝑃(0) is true.

(Induction Step): Assume that 𝑃(𝑘) is true for 𝑘 ≥ 0. That is, assume that 87 |(4𝑘)! for 𝑘 ≥
0. This means that (4𝑘)! = 87 ⋅ 𝑚 for some integer 𝑚. We will now prove that 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is
true. That is, we will prove that 874, |E4(𝑘 + 1)F!. That is, we will prove that there exists an
integer 𝑛 such that E4(𝑘 + 1)F! = 874, ⋅ 𝑛. Starting with the left side of 𝑃(𝑘 + 1), we have

E4(𝑘 + 1)F! = (4𝑘 + 4)! = (4𝑘 + 4)(4𝑘 + 3)(4𝑘 + 2)(4𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘)(4𝑘 − 1) ⋯ (2)(1)
= (4𝑘 + 4)(4𝑘 + 3)(4𝑘 + 2)(4𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘)!
= 4(𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 3)2(2𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘)!
= 8(𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 3)(2𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 1)87 ⋅ 𝑚
= (𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 3)(2𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 1)874, ⋅ 𝑚

Since 𝑚 and 𝑘 are integers, (𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 3)(2𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 1) ⋅ 𝑚 is also an integer by Fact
4.1. Hence, E4(𝑘 + 1)F! = 874, ⋅ 𝑛 where 𝑛 is the integer (𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 3)(2𝑘 + 1)(4𝑘 + 1) ⋅
𝑚. By definition of divides, (874, )|(4(𝑘 + 1)!). Thus, 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true. Therefore, we have
proved the induction step that if 𝑃(𝑘) is true then 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true.

Consequently, by mathematical induction, we have proved the given statement.

∎
Crowdmark Homework #25
Proof Technique: Strong Mathematical Induction
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1

Statement: Use a proof by strong mathematical induction to prove the following

statement:

Each natural number greater than or equal to 6 can be written as the sum of natural
numbers, each of which is a 2 or a 5.

Proof: We will prove the given statement using strong mathematical induction. Let 𝑆(𝑛) be
the statement that the natural number 𝑛 ≥ 6 can be written as the sum the natural
numbers 2 and 5. That is, for each 𝑛, there exists natural numbers 𝑖 and 𝑗 such that 𝑛 =
2𝑖 + 5𝑗.

(Base Case for Strong Induction): We will prove the base cases 𝑆(6), 𝑆(7), and 𝑆(8). We
see for 𝑛 = 6, choose 𝑖 = 3 and 𝑗 = 0 such that 𝑛 = 6 = 2(3) + 5(0). For 𝑛 = 7, choose 𝑖 =
1 and 𝑗 = 1 such that 𝑛 = 7 = 2(1) + 5(1). Therefore, we have proved that 𝑆(6) and 𝑆(7) is
true.

(Induction Step for Strong Induction): We will prove the induction step that if 𝑆(𝑘 − 1) is
true, then 𝑆(𝑘 + 1) is true. Assume 𝑆(𝑘 − 1) is true. That is, there exists natural numbers 𝑢
and 𝑣 such that 𝑘 − 1 = 2𝑢 + 5𝑣. Now we see that
𝑘+1=𝑘−1+2
= 2𝑢 + 5𝑣 + 2
= 2(𝑢 + 1) + 5𝑣.
Since 𝑢 is a natural number, 𝑢 + 1 is also a natural number by Fact 4.1. Thus, 𝑆(𝑘 + 1) is
true.

Since 𝑆(6) and 𝑆(7) is true, and the induction step if 𝑆(𝑘 − 1) is true, then 𝑆(𝑘 + 1) is true,
we have proved that 𝑆(𝑛) is true for all 𝑛 ≥ 6 by strong mathematical induction.
∎

Problem 2: Use a proof by strong mathematical induction to prove the following statement:

Statement: Every positive integer 𝑛 can be expressed as

9

𝑛 = i 𝑐0 20
0:8
where 𝑐0 ∈ {0,1} for all 𝑖 from the integer 0 to some integer 𝑚.
Proof: We will prove this statement using strong mathematical induction. We will first
prove the base cases and then the induction step. Let 𝑆(𝑛) be the statement for a positive
integer 𝑛 that can be written as
9

𝑛 = i 𝑐0 20
0:8
where 𝑐0 ∈ {0,1} for all 𝑖 from the integer 0 to some integer 𝑚.

(Base Case for Strong Induction): We will prove that 𝑆(1) and 𝑆(2) is true. We see that 1 =
1 ⋅ 28 and 2 = 0 ⋅ 28 + 1 ⋅ 2, . Thus, 𝑆(1) and 𝑆(2) is true and we have established the two
base cases.

(Induction Step for Strong Induction): We will prove that if 𝑆(1), 𝑆(2), 𝑆(3), … , 𝑆(𝑘 − 1),
and 𝑆(𝑘) are true, then 𝑆(𝑘 + 1) is true. Assume that 𝑆(1), 𝑆(2), 𝑆(3), … , 𝑆(𝑘 − 1), and 𝑆(𝑘)
are true. We will prove that 𝑆(𝑘 + 1) is true by a proof by cases using two cases: 1) 𝑘 + 1 is
odd and 2) 𝑘 + 1 is even.

Case 1: Assume 𝑘 + 1 is odd. Then, 𝑘 is even and using the assumption that 𝑆(𝑘) is true,
we have
9

𝑘 = i 𝑐0 20 ,
0:8
where 𝑐8 = 0 and 𝑐0 ∈ {0,1} for each 𝑖 = 1,2,3, … , 𝑚. Thus,
9

𝑘 + 1 = i 𝑐0 20
0:8
where 𝑐8 = 1 and 𝑐0 ∈ {0,1} for each 𝑖 = 1,2,3, … , 𝑚. Therefore, 𝑆(𝑘 + 1) is true.

74, 74,
Case 2: Assume 𝑘 + 1 is even. Then, !
is an integer less then k. Since, 𝑆 d !
e is true, we
have
9
𝑘+1
= i 𝑐0 20 ,
2
0:8
where 𝑐0 ∈ {0,1} for each 𝑖 = 0,1,2,3, … , 𝑚. Thus,
9 9 94,

𝑘 + 1 = 2 ⋅ i 𝑐0 20 = i 𝑐0 204, = i 𝑐0 20 ,
0:8 0:8 0:,
where 𝑐0 ∈ {0,1} for each 𝑖 = 1,2,3, … , 𝑚 and 𝑐8 = 0. Therefore, 𝑆(𝑘 + 1) is true.

In both cases, we have proved that if 𝑆(1), 𝑆(2), 𝑆(3), … , 𝑆(𝑘 − 1), and 𝑆(𝑘) are true, then
𝑆(𝑘 + 1) is true. Hence with the base cases, by strong mathematical induction, we have
proved the given statement.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #26
Proof Technique: Mathematical Induction
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1

Statement: Prove by mathematical induction that 2. + 1 ≤ 3. for every positive integer 𝑛.

Proof: We will prove the given statement using mathematical induction. Let 𝑃(𝑛) be the
statement 2. + 1 ≤ 3. for every positive integer 𝑛.

(Base Case): We will prove that 𝑃(1) is true. Note that 2, + 1 = 3 ≤ 3, . Therefore, we have
proved 𝑃(1) is true.

(Induction Step): Assume that 𝑃(𝑘) is true. That is, 27 + 1 ≤ 37 for 𝑘 an integer. We will
prove that 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true. That is, 274, + 1 ≤ 374, . We can express the assumption as
27 ≤ 37 − 1. Now observe that

274, + 1 = 2(27 ) + 1 ≤ 2(37 − 1) + 1 = 2(37 ) − 1 ≤ 2(37 ) ≤ 3(37 ) = 374, .

Therefore, 274, + 1 ≤ 374, and 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true. Hence, by mathematical induction, we

have proved that 2. + 1 ≤ 3. for every positive integer 𝑛.
∎

Problem 2:

Statement: Using mathematical induction to prove the following statement for 𝑛 ∈ ℕ,

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
!1 − % !1 − % !1 − % !1 − % ⋯ !1 − - % ≥ + -.' .
2 4 8 16 2 4 2

Proof: We will prove the given statement using mathematical induction. Let 𝑃(𝑛) be the
' ' ' ' ' ' '
statement for each 𝑛 ∈ ℕ, -1 − %. -1 − !. -1 − /. -1 − '0. ⋯ -1 − %#. ≥ ! + %#$%.

, ,
(Base Case): We will prove that 𝑃(1) is true. The left side of 𝑃(1) is 1 − ! = ! and the right
, , , , ,
side of 𝑃(1) is 2 + !" = 2 + 2 = !. Therefore, 𝑃(1) is true.

(Induction Step): Assume that 𝑃(𝑘) is true. That is,

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
!1 − % !1 − % !1 − % !1 − % ⋯ !1 − 1 % ≥ + 1.' .
2 4 8 16 2 4 2

We will prove that 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) is true. That is, we will prove that the statement
 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
!1 − % !1 − % !1 − % !1 − % ⋯ !1 − 1.' % ≥ + 1.%
2 4 8 16 2 4 2
Is true.
Starting with the left side of 𝑃(𝑘 + 1) and using that 𝑃(𝑘) for the first k terms, we have

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
!1 − % !1 − % !1 − % !1 − % ⋯ !1 − 1 % !1 − 1.' % ≥ ! + 1.' % !1 − 1.' %
2 4 8 16 2 2 4 2 2

Multiplying the right side of this inequality out, we have

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
! + 1.' % !1 − 1.' % = + 1.' − 1.'
− 1.' 1.' .
4 2 2 4 2 4(2 ) (2 )(2 )

Putting these together, we obtain

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
!1 − % !1 − % !1 − % !1 − % ⋯ !1 − 1 % !1 − 1.' % ≥ + 1.' − 1.'
− 1.' 1.'
2 4 8 16 2 2 4 2 4(2 ) (2 )(2 )
1 1
≥ + 74, .
4 2
, ,
Now, we note that 274, ≤ 274! and hence !$%! ≥ !$%" . Thus, we finally arrive at

' ' ' ' ' ' 1 1 1 1

-1 − %. -1 − !. -1 − /. -1 − '0. ⋯ -1 − %& . -1 − %&$% . ≥ 4 + ≥4+ . Therefore, 𝑃(𝑘 + 1)
2𝑘+1 2𝑘+2
is true and we have proved the given statement using mathematical induction.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #27
Proof Technique: Any proof technique
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1

Statement: Prove the following statement:

if 𝑚, 𝑛 ∈ ℤ then {𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑚𝑛 | 𝑥 } ⊆ {𝑥 ∈ ℤ: 𝑚 | 𝑥 } ∩ { 𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑛 | 𝑥}.

Proof: Assume 𝑚, 𝑛 ∈ ℤ . We will prove that

{𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑚𝑛 | 𝑥 } ⊆ {𝑥 ∈ ℤ: 𝑚 | 𝑥 } ∩ { 𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑛 | 𝑥}.

Let 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑚𝑛 | 𝑥 }. Then, 𝑦 ∈ ℤ and (𝑚𝑛)|𝑦. By the definition of divides, we have 𝑦 =

(𝑚𝑛)𝑧 for some 𝑧 ∈ ℤ . Rewriting this by the associativity and commutativity properties, we
have 𝑦 = 𝑚(𝑛𝑧) and 𝑦 = 𝑛(𝑚𝑧) where 𝑛𝑧 and 𝑚𝑧 are integers by Fact 4.1, since 𝑚, 𝑛, and 𝑧
are integers. Hence, 𝑦 = 𝑚𝑢 and 𝑦 = 𝑛𝑣, where 𝑢 and 𝑣 are integers. Thus, by the definition
of divides, 𝑚|𝑦 and 𝑛|𝑦. This says that 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ ℤ: 𝑚|𝑥} and 𝑦 ∈ {𝑥 ∈ ℤ: 𝑛|𝑥}. By the
definition of intersection, {𝑥 ∈ ℤ: 𝑚|𝑥} ∩∈ {𝑥 ∈ ℤ: 𝑛|𝑥}. Therefore, we have proved that

{𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑚𝑛 | 𝑥 } ⊆ {𝑥 ∈ ℤ: 𝑚 | 𝑥 } ∩ { 𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑛 | 𝑥}.
∎

Problem 2: Let 𝐴 = { 𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑥 ≡ 7 (𝑚𝑜𝑑 8)} and 𝐵 = {𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑥 ≡ 3 (𝑚𝑜𝑑 4)}.

Statement: Determine if 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 or 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴, and provide a proof using an element chasing

proof or provide a disproof.

Claim 1: 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵
Proof of Claim 1: We will prove that 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵. Let 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴. Then, 𝑥 ∈ ℤ and 𝑥 ≡ 7 (𝑚𝑜𝑑 8). By
the definition of congruence modulo 8, we have that 8|(𝑥 − 7). By the definition of divides,
there exists an integer 𝑘 such that 𝑥 − 7 = 8𝑘 or 𝑥 = 8𝑘 + 7. Rewriting this, we have 𝑥 =
4(2𝑘 + 1) + 3. Since 𝑘 is an integer, 2𝑘 + 1 is an integer. Thus, 𝑥 = 4𝑖 + 3 or 𝑥 − 3 = 4𝑖 for
the integer 𝑖 = 2𝑘 + 1. By the definition of divides, we have 4|(𝑥 − 3) and by the definition
of congruence modulo 4, 𝑥 ≡ 3 (𝑚𝑜𝑑 4). Therefore, 𝑥 ∈= {𝑥 ∈ ℤ ∶ 𝑥 ≡ 3 (𝑚𝑜𝑑 4)} and
hence 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵.
∎
Claim 2: 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴

Disproof of Claim 2: To disprove 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴, we need to find an element of 𝐵 that is not in 𝐴.

Choose 𝑥 = 11. We see that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 since 4|(11 − 3) or 4|8. However, 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 since 8 does
not divide 11 − 7 = 4. Therefore, we have disproved that 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴 and hence 𝐵 ⊈ 𝐴.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #28
Proof Technique: Any proof technique
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1:

Statement: Prove that if 𝐴, 𝐵, and 𝐶 are sets, then 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) = (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶).

Proof: Let 𝐴, 𝐵, and 𝐶 are sets. We will prove that 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) = (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) by

proving that 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) and (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) ⊆ 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶).

(⊆): Let 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶). Then, by the definition of union, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∩ 𝐶. We will finish

the proof using a proof by cases with two cases: (1) 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 and (2) 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∩ 𝐶.

Case 1: Assume that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴. Since 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, we can say that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐶.

By the definition of union, we have that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ 𝐵 and 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ 𝐶. Thus, by the definition of
intersection, 𝑥 ∈ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶). Therefore, 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶).

Case 2: Assume that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 ∩ 𝐶. By the de•inition of intersection, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑥 ∈ 𝐶. Thus,

since 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵, we can say that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵. Also, since 𝑥 ∈ 𝐶, we can say that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈
𝐶. By the de•inition of union, we have that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ 𝐵 and 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ 𝐶. By the de•inition of
intersection, we arrive at 𝑥 ∈ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶). Therefore, 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪
𝐶).

In both cases, we have proved that 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶).

(⊇): Let 𝑦 ∈ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶). By the definition of intersection, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ 𝐵 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ 𝐶.

By the definition of union, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵, and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶. We can finish the proof using
a proof by cases with four cases: (i) 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴, (ii) 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶, (iii) 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑦 ∈
𝐴, and (iv) 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶. We can capture these four cases in just two cases consisting of
(𝑎) 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 and (b) 𝑦 ∉ 𝐴.

Case a: Assume 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴. Then, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∩ 𝐶. Thus, by the definition of union, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∪

(𝐵 ∩ 𝐶). Therefore, (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) ⊆ 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶).

Case b: Assume 𝑦 ∉ 𝐴. Since 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵, and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 and 𝑦 ∉ 𝐴, we have that

𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶. By the definition of intersection, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∩ 𝐶. Thus, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∩ 𝐶 and
hence 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶). Therefore, (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) ⊆ 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶).

In both cases we have proved that (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) ⊆ 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶).

Consequently, since we proved that 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) and (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩

(𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) ⊆ 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶), we have proved that 𝐴 ∪ (𝐵 ∩ 𝐶) = (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) ∩ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶).
 ∎

Problem 2:

Statement: Suppose 𝐴, 𝐵, and 𝐶 are sets. Prove that if 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵, then 𝐴 × 𝐶 ⊆ 𝐵 × 𝐶.

Proof: Assume that 𝐴, 𝐵, and 𝐶 are sets and 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵. We will prove that 𝐴 × 𝐶 ⊆ 𝐵 × 𝐶. To do
this, we need to use a proof by cases with two cases: (1) 𝐶 = ∅ and (2) 𝐶 ≠ ∅.

Case (1): Assume 𝐶 = ∅. We will now prove a claim that will establish this case.

Claim: If 𝐶 = ∅, then for any nonempty set 𝐴, 𝐴 × 𝐶 = ∅.

Proof of the claim: Note that in Chapter 1, ∅ = { }. That is, the empty set is the set that
does not can any elements. We will use a proof by contradiction to prove the statement.
Let 𝐴 be any set. Assume that 𝐶 = ∅ and 𝐴 × 𝐶 ≠ ∅. Then, there is an element (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈
𝐴 × 𝐶. By definition of Cartesian Product, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶. We have arrived a contradiction,
since 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶 contradicts that 𝐶 = ∅. Therefore, our assumption that 𝐴 × 𝐶 ≠ ∅ is a false
assumption, and therefore 𝐴 × 𝐶 = ∅. By the claim, we can conclude that 𝐴 × 𝐶 = ∅ and
𝐵 × 𝐶 = ∅, and thus since ∅ ⊆ ∅, 𝐴 × 𝐶 ⊆ 𝐵 × 𝐶. We have proved the statement in case (1).

Case (2): Assume 𝐶 ≠ ∅. Let (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐴 × 𝐶. We will prove that (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐵 × 𝐶. By the
definition of Cartesian Product, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐶. Since 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵, we have that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑦 ∈
𝐶.
Thus, (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐵 × 𝐶 and we have proved that 𝐴 × 𝐶 ⊆ 𝐵 × 𝐶.

In both cases, we have proved that 𝐴 × 𝐶 ⊆ 𝐵 × 𝐶.

∎
Crowdmark Homework #29
Proof Technique: Any proof technique
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1: Suppose 𝐴 and 𝐵 are sets. Prove 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 if and only if 𝐴 − 𝐵 = ∅.

Statement:

Proof: Let 𝐴 and 𝐵 be sets.

We will prove the following conditional statements (1) if 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵, then 𝐴 − 𝐵 = ∅, and (2) if
𝐴 − 𝐵 = ∅, then 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 to prove the given if and only if statement.

(⟹): Assume that 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵. We will prove that 𝐴 − 𝐵 = ∅ using a proof by contradiction. That
is, we will also assume that 𝐴 − 𝐵 ≠ ∅. Then, there is an element 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 − 𝐵. By the
definition of set di^erence, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑦 ∉ 𝐵. Since 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴, we know that 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵.
We have arrived at a contradiction, since 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑦 ∉ 𝐵. Thus, we conclude that our
assumption that 𝐴 − 𝐵 ≠ ∅ is a false assumption and hence 𝐴 − 𝐵 = ∅. Therefore, we have
proved using a proof by contradiction that the given statement is true.

(⟸): We will prove that if 𝐴 − 𝐵 = ∅ then 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵, using a proof of the contrapositive

statement. That is, we will prove that if 𝐴 ⋢ 𝐵, then 𝐴 − 𝐵 ≠ ∅. Assume that 𝐴 ⋢ 𝐵.Then
using the negation of the definition of subset (𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵), there is a 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑦 ∉ 𝐵. Thus, by
the definition of set di^erence, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴 − 𝐵. Therefore, we can conclude by the negation of
the definition of the empty set, 𝐴 − 𝐵 ≠ ∅. Therefore, we have proved the logical equivalent
contrapositive of the given statement and hence if 𝐴 − 𝐵 = ∅ then 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵.

Since we have proved (1) and (2), we have proved the biconditional statement, 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵 if and
only if 𝐴 − 𝐵 = ∅.
∎

Problem 2:

Statement: If 𝐴 and 𝐵 are sets in a universal set 𝑈, then “““““““

𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 = 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“.

“““““““
Proof: We will prove this statement by proving (1) 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“ and (2) “““““““
𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊇ 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“.

66666666
(⊆): Let 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵. Then, by the definition of the complement of a set, 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 ∩
𝐵. By the negation of the definition of intersection (i.e., 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 means 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑥 ∈
𝐵), we have that 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∉ 𝐵. We will finish the proof by using a proof by cases with
(1) 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 and (2) 𝑥 ∉ 𝐵.
Case (1): Assume that 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴, where 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈. By the definition of the complement of a set,
𝑥 ∈ 𝑈 − 𝐴. Thus, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴̅. Hence, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴̅ or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵“. By the definition of union, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“. We
“““““““
have proved that 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“.

Case (2): Assume that 𝑥 ∉ 𝐵, where 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈. By the definition of the complement of a set,
𝑥 ∈ 𝑈 − 𝐵. Thus, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵“. Hence, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴̅ or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵“. By the definition of union, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“. We
“““““““
have proved that 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“.

In both cases, we have proved that “““““““

𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“.

8 . By the definition of union, we have 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴̅ or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵

8∪𝐵
(⊇): Let 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 “ . We will finish the
proof using a proof by cases with two cases: (a) 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴̅ and (b) 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵“.

Case (a): Assume that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴̅. By the definition of set complement, 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴. By
the negation of the definition of intersection (i.e., 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵), we have 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∉
𝐵. We will finish this case using a proof by case with two cases: (i) 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 and (ii) 𝑥 ∉ 𝐵.

Case (i): Assume that 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴. Since 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴, then by the negation of 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴,

we have that 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵. Since 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵, then 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈 − (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵). By the definition
“““““““
of the complement of a set, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 and we have proved that 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“ ⊆ 𝐴
“““““““
∩ 𝐵.

Case (ii): Assume that 𝑥 ∉ 𝐵. Since 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐵 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐵, then by the negation of 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊆

𝐵, we have that 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵. Since 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵, then 𝑥 ∈ 𝑈 − (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵). By the
“““““““
definition of the complement of a set, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 and we have proved that 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“ ⊆ “““““““
𝐴 ∩ 𝐵.

In both cases, we have proved that 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“ ⊆ “““““““

𝐴 ∩ 𝐵.

Since, we have proved that “““““““

𝐴 ∩ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“ and 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“ ⊆ 𝐴
“““““““
∩ 𝐵, we have proved the
given statement 𝐴̅ ∪ 𝐵“ = “““““““
𝐴 ∩ 𝐵.
∎
Crowdmark Homework #30
Proof Technique: Any proof technique
Math 303 – Fall 2024

Problem 1:

Statement: If 𝐴, 𝐵 and 𝐶 are sets, then (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 = (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶).

Proof: Assume that 𝐴, 𝐵 and 𝐶 are sets. We will prove that (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 = (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 −

𝐶) by proving (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 ⊆ (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶) and (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 ⊇ (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶).

(⊆): Let 𝑥 ∈ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶. By the definition set complement, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ 𝐵 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶. Thus, by

the definition of union, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵, and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶. We will complete the proof by using a
proof by cases with two cases: (1) 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶 and (2) 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶.

Case (1): Assume that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶. Then, by the definition of the set di^erence, 𝑥 ∈
𝐴 − 𝐶. Thus, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 − 𝐶 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 − 𝐶. By the definition of union, 𝑥 ∈ (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶) and
we have proved in this case, (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 ⊆ (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶).

Case (2): Assume that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶. Then, by the definition of the set di^erence, 𝑥 ∈
𝐵 − 𝐶. Thus, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 − 𝐶 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 − 𝐶. By the definition of union, 𝑥 ∈ (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶) and
we have proved in this case, (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 ⊆ (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶).

In both cases, we have proved that (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 ⊆ (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶).

(⊇): Let 𝑥 ∈ (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶). By the definition of union, we have that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 − 𝐶 or 𝑥 ∈

𝐵 − 𝐶. We will finish the proof using a proof by cases with two cases: (i) 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 − 𝐶 and (ii)
𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 − 𝐶.

Case (i): Assume that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 − 𝐶. By the definition of set di^erence, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶. Since
𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, we have that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵. Thus, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵, and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶. By the definition of set
di^erence, 𝑥 ∈ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 and we have proved that (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 for
this case.

Case (ii): Assume that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 − 𝐶. By the definition of set di^erence, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶. Since
𝑥 ∈ 𝐵, we have that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵. Thus, 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐵, and 𝑥 ∉ 𝐶. By the definition of set
di^erence, 𝑥 ∈ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 and we have proved that (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 for
this case.

In both cases, we have proved that (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶.

Therefore, since (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 ⊆ (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶) and (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶,

we have proved that (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵) − 𝐶 = (𝐴 − 𝐶) ∪ (𝐵 − 𝐶).
 ∎

Problem 2:

Statement: Suppose 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 and 𝐷 are sets. Prove that

(𝐴 × 𝐵) ∪ (𝐶 × 𝐷) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) × (𝐵 ∪ 𝐷).

Proof: Let (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ (𝐴 × 𝐵) ∪ (𝐶 × 𝐷). By the definition of union, (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐴 × 𝐵 or (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈

𝐶 × 𝐷. We will use a proof by cases with two cases: (1) (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐴 × 𝐵 and (2) (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈
𝐶 × 𝐷.

Case (1): Assume (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐴 × 𝐵. By the definition of Cartesian Product, we have that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴
and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵. This is equivalent to 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐶, and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 or 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷. By the definition of
union, we have 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ 𝐶 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∪ 𝐷. By the definition of Cartesian Product, we have
(𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) × (𝐵 ∪ 𝐷) and have proved in this case (𝐴 × 𝐵) ∪ (𝐶 × 𝐷) ⊆
(𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) × (𝐵 ∪ 𝐷).

Case (2): Assume (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐶 × 𝐷. By the definition of Cartesian Product, we have that 𝑥 ∈ 𝐶
and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷. This is equivalent to 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 or 𝑥 ∈ 𝐶, and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 or 𝑦 ∈ 𝐷. By the definition of
union, we have 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∪ 𝐶 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝐵 ∪ 𝐷. By the definition of Cartesian Product, we have
(𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) × (𝐵 ∪ 𝐷) and have proved in this case (𝐴 × 𝐵) ∪ (𝐶 × 𝐷) ⊆
(𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) × (𝐵 ∪ 𝐷).

In both cases, we have proved that (𝐴 × 𝐵) ∪ (𝐶 × 𝐷) ⊆ (𝐴 ∪ 𝐶) × (𝐵 ∪ 𝐷).

∎