Logic

lev888

Full Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2018
Messages
647
Again, an example would help.
There are areas of math where problems have variables that do change. But it's clear from the problem statement which variables change and which don't. E.g. a diver steps off the diving platform that is 5 meters high. If the initial speed is 0 m/sec what will be his speed when he touches the water? Here the speed is 0 m/sec initially, but we know from observing falling apples that it increases based on certain laws of physics. But the platform height stays the same - we can assume that while the diver is in the air nobody drained the pool.
 

Ryan$

Full Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
337
Hi guys, may please anyone in its explanation explain to me what does "the same" means in math?
I mean, once we have two things are equal, x=y for example, then we say that x is the same as y or vice versa, what's confusing me what do we intend once we said "the same" ? I know it's simple logic but if my simple logic sucks, then I can't complete learning, and by you guys I believe that I will close those gaps.

I define the same is: two things the same regardless to its cosmetics, I mean regardless to what we call the variables, if they are referring to the same object then they are the "same" .. is this a good enough explanation to define what same is?
 

Ryan$

Full Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
337
Also can I say that same means "doesn't matter which once to use of the two equal variables, they are the same" ?!
 

lev888

Full Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2018
Messages
647
Also can I say that same means "doesn't matter which once to use of the two equal variables, they are the same" ?!
Once again, example would help.

x = y means the 2 variables have the same value.
 

HallsofIvy

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
5,370
"x= y" means that "x" and "y" are two symbols both representing the same number ("same" here having its usual English meaning). Some times you will see "same" used to mean that two things are "equivalent" under a previously define equivalence relation.
 

JeffM

Elite Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
4,001
We have said before that what "same" means depends on context. In elementary algebra, it generally means that two sets of symbols represent the same numeric value.

\(\displaystyle 3 + 7 = (2 * 9) - 8.\)

In other branches of mathematics, it may have a different meaning

\(\displaystyle f'(x) = g'(x)\)

means that two functions have equivalent derivatives, which are functions rather than numbers.

What it always means, however, is that you can replace what is on one side of the equality with what is on the other whenever that is convenient.

And whatever do you mean by "cosmetics?" The primary meaning of that word refers to things like lipstick and fingernail polish.
 

Otis

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Messages
1,971
… whenever I conclude something or [it's] given … then it's fixed and there's no real life consequences …
I can't say that applies to all parts of every math exercise, but -- in general -- the given conditions of an exercise don't change.

And, yes, if you're told that x=6 for some specific purpose, then x is 6 for that purpose and you don't need to consider that 6 might change into a different number in that part of the exercise.

I agree with lev888, above. When you feel uncertain about something in an exercise, I think you need to post the complete exercise statement verbatim, and then tell us what you're thinking. When you ask questions by making up bits and pieces of unrelated stuff as examples, it puts us in the position of trying to generalize about situations we can't see. There are exceptions in math, so I think working with a specific, complete exercise statement is the best way to deal with your concerns.

😎
 

Ryan$

Full Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
337
Hi guys! once again I'm sorry for posting like those question, but I really not succeeding solving those gaps by myself and thanks alot.

My problem is like this, lets assume that's x=y=z , then we conclude x=z ! it's really fine but it's a conclusion and not given data.
so now if I do z+m= 5, can I assign instead of z, x? I mean to write x+m=5 ?! what's confusing me because we conclude that x=z but it's not given information, given x=y=z, and from this we conclude x=z so I'm asking can I depend also on my implicitly conclusion of the given data(x=y=z) ?! thanks alot !
 

Ryan$

Full Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
337
what I'm asking about is, can we take the "conclusions logic" of specific equation(that's given in advance) as a given information?!
 

JeffM

Elite Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
4,001
Hi guys! once again I'm sorry for posting like those question, but I really not succeeding solving those gaps by myself and thanks alot.

My problem is like this, lets assume that's x=y=z , then we conclude x=z ! it's really fine but it's a conclusion and not given data.
so now if I do z+m= 5, can I assign instead of z, x? I mean to write x+m=5 ?! what's confusing me because we conclude that x=z but it's not given information, given x=y=z, and from this we conclude x=z so I'm asking can I depend also on my implicitly conclusion of the given data(x=y=z) ?! thanks alot !
Your questions border on the incoherent.

You start with the GIVEN data that x = y = z. (Actually that is sloppy and confusing because equality is a binary relation. So what you really mean is "GIVEN x = y and y = z.")

Yes, you are ABSOLUTELY correct that we are not told that x = z. Instead, we have an axiom that says

\(\displaystyle x = y \text { and } y = z \implies x = z.\)

It is not something that we must derive. It is an axiom that we are allowed to use without proof. It is a generalization of this example.

\(\displaystyle 3 + 8 = 11 \text { and } 11 = 17 - 6 \implies 3 + 8 = 17 - 6.\)

You can demonstrate physically the above example. Standard mathematics generalizes from that example and many similar examples to say that, in all cases,

\(\displaystyle x = y \text { and } y = z \implies x = z.\)

Now if you want, you can build a NON-STANDARD mathematics that denies that axiom, but I doubt it will be very useful when applied to the real world.
 

Otis

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Messages
1,971
… lets assume … x=y=z …

… we conclude that x=z but it's not given …
That's correct. It's not given because you assumed it.

Nobody here knows what is given, until you post a complete exercise statement.

:confused:
 

Ryan$

Full Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
337
Hi guys, I'm really struggling something which I couldn't find a solution for it!
I always going to negatively what result I get.
I mean, lets assume I get from equation logic that x=2y.
so " I " can assume x != 2y (not equal) .. why not? while the logic is giving me opportunity to do whatever things in general why not claiming that assumption?! I can think in general and one of possibilities of general is x != 2y .. so it's possible !
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JeffM

Elite Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
4,001
Yes, you may make up any mathematics you want.

In your mathematics,

\(\displaystyle 6 = 2 * 3 \implies 6 \ne 2 * 3.\)

I understand. Unfortunately, we do not answer questions about Ryan-math. You will have to ask Ryan about it.
 

tkhunny

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
10,304
3 = 5 - False
4 = 4 - True
x = 2y - Conditionally True. One must pick x and y that work.
 

Otis

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Messages
1,971
… I always going to negatively what result I get …
I don't understand what you mean.

Please post the complete exercise statement.

:confused:
 

JeffM

Elite Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
4,001
I don't understand what you mean.

Please post the complete exercise statement.

:confused:
There is no exercise statement. He is trying to find ways to contradict basic axioms.
 

pka

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2005
Messages
8,807
There is no exercise statement. He is trying to find ways to contradict basic axioms.
I am very reluctant to call names. But Ryan$ takes the cake S/he is by any means of the imagination an InterNet TROLL.
Please, please follow that LINK. If anyone can argue that Ryan$ fails to fulfill that definition of a TROLL please post your justifications.
In the absent of any cogent defense I ask that Ryan$ be banded.
 

Otis

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Messages
1,971
… If anyone can argue that Ryan$ fails to fulfill that definition of a TROLL please post your justifications …
Ryan$ has the mind of a child.

… from equation logic … x=2y …
… logic [lets me] do whatever …
… I can think in general … so it's possible [that x≠2y]
:rolleyes:
 

JeffM

Elite Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
4,001

mmm4444bot

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
10,398
I suspect that he is a child. I have not seen malicious intent.
Agree!

We've asked Ryan$ to follow the guidelines, so tutors can know what he's talking about. I intend to start enforcing those requests.

😐
 
Top