True, the assumptions is assumed false, then leads to impossiblility, the assumption has been proved true. Ask away with AnswerParty!!!
Mathematical logic is a subfield of mathematics exploring the applications of formal logic to mathematics. Topically, mathematical logic bears close connections to metamathematics, the foundations of mathematics, and theoretical computer science. The unifying themes in mathematical logic include the study of the expressive power of formal systems and the deductive power of formal proof systems.
Mathematical logic is often divided into the fields of set theory, model theory, recursion theory, and proof theory. These areas share basic results on logic, particularly first-order logic, and definability. In computer science (particularly in the ACM Classification) mathematical logic encompasses additional topics not detailed in this article; see logic in computer science for those.
Proof by contradiction
In mathematics, a proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement. In the argument, other previously established statements, such as theorems, can be used. In principle, a proof can be traced back to self-evident or assumed statements, known as axioms. Proofs are examples of deductive reasoning and are distinguished from inductive or empirical arguments; a proof must demonstrate that a statement is always true (occasionally by listing all possible cases and showing that it holds in each), rather than enumerate many confirmatory cases. An unproven statement that is believed true is known as a conjecture.
Proofs employ logic but usually include some amount of natural language which usually admits some ambiguity. In fact, the vast majority of proofs in written mathematics can be considered as applications of rigorous informal logic. Purely formal proofs, written in symbolic language instead of natural language, are considered in proof theory. The distinction between formal and informal proofs has led to much examination of current and historical mathematical practice, quasi-empiricism in mathematics, and so-called folk mathematics (in both senses of that term). The philosophy of mathematics is concerned with the role of language and logic in proofs, and mathematics as a language.
In logic, proof by contradiction is a form of proof that establishes the truth or validity of a proposition by showing that the proposition's being false would imply a contradiction. Proof by contradiction is also known as indirect proof, apagogical argument, proof by assuming the opposite, and reductio ad impossibilem. It is a particular kind of the more general form of argument known as reductio ad absurdum.
G. H. Hardy described proof by contradiction as "one of a mathematician's finest weapons", saying "It is a far finer gambit than any chess gambit: a chess player may offer the sacrifice of a pawn or even a piece, but a mathematician offers the game."
In mathematics and logic, a direct proof is a way of showing the truth or falsehood of a given statement by a straightforward combination of established facts, usually existing lemmas and theorems, without making any further assumptions. In order to directly prove a conditional statement of the form "If p, then q", it suffices to consider the situations in which the statement p is true. Logical deduction is employed to reason from assumptions to conclusion. The type of logic employed is almost invariably first-order logic, employing the quantifiers for all and there exists. Common proof rules used are modus ponens and universal instantiation.
In contrast, an indirect proof may begin with certain hypothetical scenarios and then proceed to eliminate the uncertainties in each of these scenarios until an inescapable conclusion is forced. For example instead of showing directly p ⇒ q, one proves its contrapositive ~q ⇒ ~p (one assumes ~q and shows that it leads to ~p). Since p ⇒ q and ~q ⇒ ~p are equivalent by the principle of transposition (see law of excluded middle), p ⇒ q is indirectly proved. Proof methods that are not direct include proof by contradiction, including proof by infinite descent. Direct proof methods include proof by exhaustion and proof by induction.
In philosophy and logic, the liar paradox or liar's paradox (pseudomenon in Ancient Greek) is the statement "this sentence is false." Trying to assign to this statement a classical binary truth value leads to a contradiction (see paradox).
If "this sentence is false" is true, then the sentence is false, which is a contradiction. Conversely, if "this sentence is false" is false, then the sentence is true, which is also a contradiction.