0
In the body of a direct proof you must show that the assumption leads to a contradiction?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
False
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Does the body of a direct proof show that the assumption leads to a contradiction?
False
True or false In the body of a direct proof you must show that the assumption leads to a contradiction?
false
True or false In the body of an indirect proof you must show that the assumption leads to a contradiction?
TrueIt is true that the body of an indirect proof you must show that the assumption leads to a contradiction. In math a proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement.
True or false In the body of an indirect proof you must show that the assumption leads to a contradiction.?
TrueIt is true that the body of an indirect proof you must show that the assumption leads to a contradiction. In math a proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement.
In a body of an indirect proof you must show that the assumption leads to a contradiction?
true
In the body of an indirect proof you must show that the assumption leads to a contradiction?
true
When using a indirect proof you show that the negation of the desired conclusion leads to a contradiction?
True
What are the steps to writing an Indirect Proof in Geometry?
Identify the conjecture to be proven.Assume the opposite of the conclusion is true.Use direct reasoning to show that the assumption leads to a contradiction.Conclude that the assumption is false and hence that the original conjecture must be true.
In what kind of proof do you assume the opposite of what you want to prove?
This is a "proof by contradiction", where the evidence would fail to support the reverse assumption, giving credence to the original hypothesis.
How does an indirect proof differ from a regular proof?
Given a proposition X, a regular proof known facts and logical arguments to show that X must be true. For an indirect proof, you assume that the negation of X is true. You then use known facts and logical arguments to show that this leads to a contradiction. The conclusion then is that the assumption about ~X being true is false and that is equivalent to showing that X is true.
Which term best describes a proof in which you assume the opposite of what you wan to prove?
Proof by contradiction (APEX)
What is another name for a proof of contradiction?
Proof by contradiction is also known by its Latin equivalent, reductio ad absurdum.
