Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I've been trying to prove this for a long time now, anyone willing to offer some help or get me pointed in the right direction?

$(x>0 \implies z = x) \wedge (x < 0 \implies z = -x) \implies z \ge 0$

share|cite|improve this question
Re-tagged as "logic" instead of "higher-order-logic", as this is first-order logic. – Alex Becker Mar 21 '11 at 0:13
up vote 4 down vote accepted

Hint: What happens if x = 0? Does that say anything about z?

share|cite|improve this answer

As Robert's answer indicates, the statement is false. However, changing the first $>$ to $\geq$ gives a true statement which I would use a proof by contradiction, that is assume $z < 0$ and $(x \geq 0 \implies z = x) \wedge (x < 0 \implies z = -x)$ and derive a contradiction. This can be done as follows:

$(z < 0) \wedge ((x>0 \implies z = x) \wedge (x < 0 \implies z = -x))$ $\implies (((x \geq 0 \implies z = x) \wedge z < 0) \wedge ((x < 0 \implies z = -x) \wedge z < 0))$ $\implies ((x \geq 0 \implies x < 0) \wedge (x < 0 \implies -x < 0))$ $\implies ((F \wedge (x < 0 \implies -x < 0)) \vee ((x \geq 0 \implies x < 0) \wedge F))$ $\implies (F \vee F)$ $\implies F$ $\therefore \neg((z < 0) \wedge ((x \geq 0 \implies z = x) \wedge (x < 0 \implies z = -x)))$ $\therefore (x \geq 0 \implies z = x) \wedge (x < 0 \implies z = -x) \implies z \ge 0$

share|cite|improve this answer
As @Robert's answer indicates, the statement is actually false, since $x$ need not be either $<0$ or $>0$; it could be $0$ (if it's implicitly assumed to be a real number; else it could also be $2+3\mathrm{i}$ or something else entirely). It follows that this proof must be flawed. The error is in replacing $(x>0\implies x<0)$ by $F$, since this implication is actually true if $x>0$ is false. – joriki Mar 24 '11 at 6:13
@Joriki: Thanks, I missed that. Fixed. – Alex Becker Mar 24 '11 at 6:36

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.