Skip to main content

Section 6.7 Proof by counterexample

Sometimes we want to prove that \(P \not\lgcimplies Q \text{;}\) that is, that \(P \lgccond Q \) is not a tautology.

Recall.

The equivalence
\begin{equation*} P \lgccond Q \lgcequiv (P \lgcand C_1 \lgccond Q) \lgcand \dotsb \lgcand (P \lgcand C_m \lgccond Q) \end{equation*}
holds for any set of cases \(C_1, C_2, \dotsc, C_m \) such that \(C_1 \lgcor \dotsb \lgcor C_m \) is a tautology. (See Sectionย 6.4.)
So if \(P \lgcand C_i \lgccond Q \) is not a tautology for at least one \(i \text{,}\) then \(P \lgccond Q \) also cannot be a tautology. Again, this also works in the universal case since \(\forall \) distributes over \(\lgcand \) (Propositionย 4.2.7).
counterexample
relative to the logical implication \(P \lgcimplies Q \text{,}\) a statement \(C \) such that \(P \lgcand C \lgccond Q \) is false

Worked Example 6.7.1.

In Exerciseย 6.12.8, you are asked to prove the following statement by proving the contrapositive.
If \(2^n - 1 \) prime, then \(n \) is prime.
Prove that the converse of this statement is false.
Solution.
The converse statement is โ€œIf \(n \) is prime, then \(2^n - 1 \) is prime.โ€ But the case \(n=11 \) is a counterexample:
\begin{equation*} 2^{11} - 1 = 2047 = 23 \cdot 89 \end{equation*}
is not prime even though \(n = 11 \) is prime.

Check your understanding.