CHAPTER 2

2 ELEMENTARY NUMBER THEORY AND METHODS OF PROOF

2.1 INTRODUCTION
Elementary Number Theory is likely to be familiar to you. It studies the
properties of the integers (whole numbers), rational numbers (integer
fractions), and real numbers. The main question of this section is to determine
the truth or falsity of a mathematical statement on some properties related
Elementary Number Theory. (Propositional Logic and Methods of proof will be
used to prove those mathematical statements)

Example 1

For any real number x, the floor of x, ⌊x⌋, is the largest integer that is less than
or equal to x. Thus, ⌊2.3⌋ = 2; ⌊12.99999⌋ = 12; ⌊−1.5⌋ = −2

This is an example of the mathematical statements that we may investigate

throughout this section:

• For any real number x, is ⌊x−1⌋ = ⌊x⌋ −1?

yes (true)
• For any real numbers x and y, is ⌊x−y⌋ = ⌊x⌋ − ⌊y⌋?
no (false) Because

o ⌊2.0−1.1⌋ = ⌊0.9⌋ = 0

o ⌊2.0⌋ − ⌊1.1⌋ = 2 − 1 = 1

In this section, we assume the three properties of equality which are for all
objects A, B, and C;

(1)𝐴 = 𝐴,
(2)if 𝐴 = 𝐵, then 𝐵 = 𝐴, and (3) if 𝐴 = 𝐵 and 𝐵 = 𝐶, then 𝐴 = 𝐶 .

Moreover, we assume that the set of integers is closed under addition,

subtraction, and multiplication. This means that sums, differences, and

1
products of integers are integers. This is not the case in division operation
because the quotient of two integers is most of the time not an integer.

Finally, the laws of basic algebra are assumed to be familiar to the student,
which are listed in Appendix A.

2.2 EVEN AND ODD (DEFINITIONS AND METHODS OF PROOF I)

In this section, we will deal with problems related to even and odd, prime and
composite numbers. So, we will start with some definitions, then examples on
how to use them in proving or disproving some mathematical statements.

Even and Odd Numbers

• An integer 𝑛 is even if, and only if, 𝑛 equals twice some
integer.
• An integer 𝑛 is odd if, and only if, 𝑛 equals twice some
integer plus 1.
• Symbolically, if 𝑛 is an integer, then
• 𝑛 is even ⟺ ∃ an integer 𝑘 such that 𝑛 = 2𝑘.
• 𝑛 is odd ⟺ ∃ an integer 𝑘 such that 𝑛 = 2𝑘 + 1.

From the definition of even numbers, that if you are doing a problem in which you
happen to know that a certain integer is even, you can deduce that it has the form
2×(some integer). Conversely, if you know in some situation that a particular
integer equals 2×(some integer), then you can deduce that the integer is even.

Example 2:

Use the definitions of even and odd to justify the following questions.

a. Is 0 even?
b. Is −301 odd?
c. If 𝑎 and 𝑏 are integers, is 6𝑎2 𝑏 even?
d. If 𝑎 and 𝑏 are integers, is 10𝑎 + 8𝑏 + 1 odd?
Solution:

a. Yes, 0 = 2 × 0.

2
b. Yes, −301 = 2(−151) + 1.
c. Yes, 6𝑎^2 𝑏 − 2(3𝑎^2 𝑏), and since 𝑎 and 𝑏 are integers, so is 3𝑎2 𝑏 (being a
product of integers).
d. Yes, 10𝑎 + 8𝑏 + 1 = 2(5𝑎 + 4𝑏) + 1, and since 𝑎 and 𝑏 are integers, so is 5𝑎 +
4𝑏𝑛 (being a sum of products of integers).

Prime and Composite Numbers

• An integer 𝑛 is prime if, and only if, 𝑛 > 1 and for all
positive integers r and s, if 𝑛 = 𝑟 × 𝑠, then 𝑟 = 1 or 𝑠 =
1.
• An integer 𝑛 is composite if, and only if, 𝑛 > 1 and 𝑛 =
𝑟 × 𝑠 for some positive integers 𝑟 and 𝑠 with 𝑟 ≠ 1 and 𝑠 ≠
1.
• Symbolically, if 𝑛 is an integer that is greater than 1, then,
• 𝑛 is prime ⟺ ∀ positive integers 𝑟 and 𝑠, if 𝑛 = 𝑟 ×
𝑠, then 𝑟 = 1 or 𝑠 = 1.
• 𝑛 is composite ⟺ ∃ positive integers 𝑟 and 𝑠 such that
𝑛 = 𝑟 × 𝑠 and 𝑟 ≠ 1 and 𝑠 ≠ 1.

Example 3
a. Is 1 prime?
b. Is it true that every integer greater than 1 is either prime or composite?
c. Write the first six prime numbers.
d. Write the first six composite numbers.

Solution
a. No. A prime number is required to be greater than 1.
b. Yes. For any integer greater than 1, the two definitions are negations of each
other.
c. 2,3,5,7, 11, 13
d. 4,6,8,9,10,12

3
2.2.1 PROOF OF EXISTENTIAL STATEMENTS

An existential statement in the form “ ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝐷 such that 𝑄(𝑥)” can be

proved by;

Method 1 Constructive: To find any 𝑥 ∈ 𝐷 such that 𝑄(𝑥) is true.

Example 4: Prove the following: ∃ an even integer 𝑛 that can be written

in two ways as a sum of two prime numbers.

Solution

Let 𝑛 = 10 . Since 10 = 5 + 5 = 3 + 7 , and 3,5 and 7 are all prime

numbers. ∎

Method 2 Nonconstructive: To give a set of directions for finding such 𝑥.

Example 5: Suppose that 𝑟 and 𝑠 are integers. Prove the following: ∃ an

integer 𝑘 such that 22𝑟 + 18𝑠 = 2𝑘.

Solution

Let 𝑘 = 11𝑟 + 9𝑠. Then 𝑘 is an integer because it is the sum of products

of integers. By substitution in 2𝑘 = 2(11𝑟 + 9𝑠) = 22𝑟 + 18𝑠. ∎

2.2.2 DISPROOF OF UNIVERSAL STATEMENT

To disprove a statement of the form ∀x ∈ D, if P(x) then Q(x), find a value

of 𝑥 in 𝐷 for which 𝑃(𝑥) is true and 𝑄(𝑥) is false. Such an 𝑥 is called a
counterexample.

Example 6:
Disprove the following statement by finding a counterexample;

∀𝑎 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑏 ∈ ℝ, if𝑎2 = 𝑏 2 then𝑎 = 𝑏.

4
 Solution

To disprove this statement, you need to find real numbers a and b such
that 𝑎2 = 𝑏 2 and 𝑎 ≠ 𝑏 . If you flip through some possibilities in your
mind, you will quickly see that 1 and −1 will work (or 2 and −2, and so
forth).
Counterexample: Let 𝑎 = 1 and 𝑏 = −1 . Then 𝑎2 = 12 = 1 and 𝑏 2 =
(−1)2 = 1,
and so 𝑎2 = 𝑏 2 . But 𝑎 ≠ 𝑏 since 1 ≠ −1. ∎

2.2.3 PROOF OF UNIVERSAL STATEMENT

A universal statement in the form “ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐷 if𝑃(𝑥), then 𝑄(𝑥)” can be

proved by;

• Exhaustion Method:

This method applies the universal statement ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐷 . This is feasible

when 𝐷 is finite. Note that most of the universal statements in
mathematics with infinite domain so this method can be rarely used to
prove them.

Example 7

Use the method of exhaustion to prove the following statement:

∀𝑛 ∈ 𝑍, if 𝑛 is even and 4 ≤ 𝑛 ≤ 24, then 𝑛 can be written as a sum

of two prime numbers.

Solution 4 = 2 + 2, 6 = 3 + 3, 8 = 3 + 5, 10 = 5 + 5

12 = 5 + 7, 14 = 11 + 3, 16 = 5 + 11, 18 = 7 + 11

20 = 7 + 13, 22 = 5 + 17 and 24 = 5 + 19

Therefore, if 𝑛 is even and 4 ≤ 𝑛 ≤ 24, then 𝑛 can be written as a sum

of two prime numbers.∎

5
• Direct Method:
The most powerful technique for proving a universal statement is one
that works regardless of the size of the domain over which the statement
is quantified. It is called the method of generalizing from the generic
particular.
Method of Direct Proof
1: Express the statement to be proved in the form "∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐷 , if 𝑃(𝑥)
then 𝑄(𝑥)." (This step is often done mentally.)
2: Start the proof by supposing 𝑥 is a particular but arbitrarily chosen
element of 𝐷 for which the hypothesis 𝑃(𝑥) is true. (This step is
often abbreviated "Suppose 𝑥 ∈ 𝐷 and 𝑃(𝑥).")
3: Show that the conclusion 𝑄(𝑥) is true by using definitions,
previously established results, and the rules for logical inference
(Lecture 1).

Example 7

Prove that the sum of any two even integers is even.

Solution

Solution Whenever you are presented with a statement to be proved, it

is a good idea to ask yourself whether you believe it to be true. In this
case you might imagine some pairs of even integers, say 2 + 4, 6 +
10, 12 + 12, 28 + 54 , and mentally check that their sums are even.
However, since you cannot possibly check all pairs of even numbers, you
cannot know for sure that the statement is true in general by checking its
truth in these particular instances.

To prove this statement in general, you need to show that no matter what
even integers are given, their sum is even. But given any two even
integers, it is possible to represent them as 2𝑟 and 2𝑠 for some integers
𝑟 and 𝑠. And by the distributive law of algebra,

2𝑟 + 2𝑠 = 2(𝑟 + 𝑠), which is even. Thus, the statement is true in general.

6
Formal Restatement: ∀ integers 𝑚 and 𝑛, if 𝑚 and 𝑛 are even then 𝑚 +
𝑛 is even.

Starting Point: Suppose m and n are any even integers.

To Show: 𝑚 + 𝑛 is even.
Since both involve the term even integer you must use the definition of
this term. It follows from the definition that since 𝑚 and 𝑛 are even,

𝑚 = 2𝑟, for some integer 𝑟 and 𝑛 = 2𝑠, for some integer 𝑠.Then 𝑚 +
𝑛 = 2𝑟 + 2𝑠. Your goal is to show that 𝑚 + 𝑛 is even.

By definition of even, this means that 𝑚 + 𝑛 can be written in the form

2 × (some integer). showing that 2𝑟 + 2𝑠 = 2(some integer).

First, because of the distributive law from algebra, which says that 2𝑟 +
2𝑠 = 2(𝑟 + 𝑠), and, second, because the sum of any two integers is an
integer

Theorem 2.2.1

• The sum of any two even integers is even.

Proof

• Suppose that 𝑚 and 𝑛 are even even integers. By definition of

even, m = 2r and 𝑛 = 2𝑠 for some integers r and s. Then,
𝑚 + 𝑛 = 2𝑟 + 2𝑠 by substitution
= 2(𝑟 + 𝑠) by factoring out a 2.
• Let 𝑘 = 𝑟 + 𝑠. Note that k is an integer because it is a sum of
an integer, which implies that 𝑟 + 𝑠 is an integer.
integers. Hence, 𝑚 + 𝑛 = 2𝑘 where k is an integer.
• It follows by definition of even that 𝑚 + 𝑛 is even.∎

7
2.2.3.1 C OMMON MISTAKES
1. Arguing from examples: it is true because it’s true in one particular case.
2. Using the same letter to mean two different things.
3. Jumping to a conclusion.
4. Circular reasoning: 𝑥 is true because 𝑦 is true since 𝑥 is true.
5. Confusion between what is known (Premises, axioms and proved
theorems) and what is still to be shown:
6. Use of any rather than some
7. Misuse of if

2.2.4 DISPROOF OF EXISTENTIAL STATEMENT

To prove an existential statement is false, you must prove a universal

statement (its negation) is true.

Example 8

Show that the following statement is false:

There is a positive integer 𝑛 such that 𝑛2 + 3𝑛 + 2 is prime.

Solution

Proving that the given statement is false is equivalent to proving its

negation is true. The negation is

For all positive integers 𝑛, 𝑛2 + 3𝑛 + 2 is not prime.

Because the negation is universal, it is proved by generalizing from the

generic particular. Claim: The statement "There is a positive integer 𝑛
such that 𝑛2 + 3𝑛 + 2is prime" is false.

Proof:

Suppose 𝑛 is any positive integer. We can factor 𝑛2 + 3𝑛 + 2 to

obtain𝑛2 + 3𝑛 + 2 = (𝑛 + 1)(𝑛 + 2). We also note that 𝑛 + 1 and 𝑛 + 2
are integers (because they are sums of integers) and that both 𝑛 + 1 > 1
and 𝑛 + 2 > 1 (because 𝑛 ≥ 1). Thus 𝑛2 + 3𝑛 + 2 is a product of two
integers each greater than 1, and so 𝑛2 + 3𝑛 + 2is not prime.∎

8
2.3 RATIONAL NUMBERS (DEFINITIONS AND METHODS OF PROOF II)
Sums, differences, and products of integers are integers. But most
quotients of integers are not integers. Quotients of integers are, however,
important; they are known as rational numbers.

In this section, we will learn about rational numbers and use the methods
of proof to prove some of their properties.

Rational Numbers
• A real number 𝑟 is rational if, and only if, it can be
expressed as a quotient of two integers with a nonzero
denominator.
• 𝑟 is rational ↔ integers a and b such that 𝑟 = 𝑎 / 𝑏 and
𝑏 ≠ 0.

Example 9

• The numbers10/3, − 5 /39, 0.281 = 281/1000, 7 = 7/1, 0 = 0/

1 are rational because they are quotients of two integers.
• The number 0.12121212 … is a rational number,
because it can be written in the form ∶ 12/99.
• Every integer is a rational number, because 𝑛 = 𝑛/1.
Recall the proof of universal statements in section 2.2.3, the direct method
is based mainly on generalizing from a generic particular. In this method,
a generic element in the domain is proved to satisfy the universal
statement.

2.3.1 DIRECT PROOF

1. Formal restatement.
2. Find the Starting point: write the hypothesis.
3. Find the conclusion that needs to be proved.
4. Use the definitions of the terms in the hypothesis to reach the
conclusion.

Example 10

Prove that the sum of any two rational numbers is rational.

9
Solution
Formal Restatement: ∀ real numbers 𝑟 and s, if 𝑟 and 𝑠 are rational then
𝑟 + 𝑠 is rational.

Starting Point: Suppose 𝑟 and 𝑠 are rational numbers.

To Show: 𝑟 + 𝑠 is rational.
Rational numbers are quotients of integers, so to say that r and s are
rational means that 𝑟 = 𝑎 / 𝑏 and 𝑠 = 𝑐 / 𝑑 , for some integers 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐,
and 𝑑, where 𝑏 ≠ 0 and 𝑑 ≠ 0.
𝑟 + 𝑠 = 𝑎/𝑏 + 𝑐/𝑑

= 𝑎𝑑 / 𝑏𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐 / 𝑏𝑑 (rewriting the fraction with a common

denominator)
= (𝑎𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐)/𝑏𝑑 (by adding fractions with a common
denominator)

Theorem 2.3.1

• The sum of any two rational numbers is rational.

Proof

• Suppose that 𝑟 and s are rational. Then, by definition of rational

𝑟 = 𝑎 / 𝑏 and 𝑠 = 𝑐 / 𝑑, for some integers 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐, and 𝑑, where
𝑏 ≠ 0 and 𝑑 ≠ 0

𝑟 + 𝑠 = 𝑎/𝑏 + 𝑐/𝑑 (By substitution)

= (𝑎𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐)/ 𝑏𝑑 (By basic algebra)

Exampl
• Let 𝑝 = (𝑎𝑑 + 𝑏𝑐) and 𝑞 = 𝑏𝑑 . Then, 𝑝 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑞 are integers
because products and sums of integers are integers and 𝑞 ≠ 0
due to the zero-product property. Thus,
𝑝
𝑟 + 𝑠= where 𝑝 and 𝑞 are integers and 𝑞 ≠ 0.
𝑞
Therefore, 𝑟 + 𝑠 are rational.∎

10
Example 11

Prove:

if 𝑎 is any even integer and 𝑏 is any odd integer, then (𝑎2 + 𝑏 2 + 1)/2 is an
integer. Using the properties:

1. The sum, product, and difference of any two even integers are even.
2. The sum and difference of any two odd integers are even.
3. The product of any two odd integers is odd.
4. The product of any even integer and any odd integer is even.
5. The sum of any odd integer and any even integer is odd.
6. The difference of any odd integer minus any even integer is odd.
7. The difference of any even integer minus any odd integer is odd.
Solution
Suppose 𝑎 is any even integer and 𝑏 is any odd integer.
• By property 3, 𝑏 is odd.
• By property 1, 𝑎2 is even.
• By property 5, 𝑎2 + 𝑏2 is odd.
• By property 2, 𝑎2 + 𝑏2 + 1 is even.
• By definition of even, there exists an integer 𝑘 such that 𝑎2 + 𝑏2 + 1 =
2𝑘
• Thus, (a2+b2+1)/2 = k, which is an integer.

Example 12

Derive the following corollary of Theorem 2.3.1:

The double of a rational number is rational.

Solution

Proof:

Suppose r is any rational number. Then, 2𝑟 = 𝑟 + 𝑟 is a sum of two

rational numbers. So, by Theorem 2.3.1, 2𝑟 is rational. ∎

11
2.4 DIVISIBILITY (DEFINITIONS AND METHODS OF PROOF III)
In this section, some properties related to the division operation will be
visited. Divisibility will be defined and some of its properties will be
proved using methods of proof.

Divisibility
• If 𝑛 and 𝑑 are integers and 𝑑 ≠ 0 then 𝑛 is divisible by 𝑑
if,and only if, 𝑛 equals 𝑑 times some integer k
• 𝑑 | 𝑛 ↔an integer 𝑘 such that 𝑛 = 𝑑𝑘
• 𝑛 is a multiple of 𝑑
• 𝑑 is a factor of 𝑛
• 𝑑 is a divisor of 𝑛
• 𝑑 divides 𝑛
• Symbolically; 𝑑|𝑛 ↔ ∃ integer 𝑘 such that 𝑛 = 𝑑𝑘

Remark!

The notation 𝑎 | 𝑏 stands for the sentence "a divides b," on the hand the
𝑎
notation 𝑎 / 𝑏 stands for the fractional number which may or may not be
𝑏
an integer.

Example 13

• 21 is divisible by 3 because 21=3×7,

• 32 is a multiple of −16 because 32=−4 ×−16,
• 5 divides 40 because 40 = 5 × 8,
• 6 is a factor of 54 because 54=6× 9,
• 7 is a factor of −7 because −7 = 7 × −1.
15
• 4 is not a factor of 15 because
4
= 3.75 which is not an integer.

12
• Any nonzero integer k divides 0 as 0 = k × 0.
Example 14

Suppose a and b are positive integers and 𝑎 | 𝑏. Is 𝑎 ≤ 𝑏?

Solution

Yes. To say that 𝑎 | 𝑏 means that 𝑏 = 𝑘𝑎 for some integer k. Now k must
be a positive integer because both 𝑎 and b are positive. It follows that

1 ≤𝑘

because every positive integer is greater than or equal to 1. Multiplying

both sides by 𝑎 give;

𝑎 ≤ 𝑘𝑎 = 𝑏 ∎

Example 15

a. If a and b are integers, is 3𝑎 + 3𝑏 divisible by 3?

b. If k and m are integers, is 10 km divisible by 5?

Solution

a. Yes. By the distributive law of algebra, 3a + 3b = 3(a + b) and a + b is

an integer because it is a sum of two integers.

b. Yes. By the associative law of algebra, 1𝑂𝑘𝑚 = 5. (2𝑘𝑚) and 2𝑘𝑚 is an

integer because it is a product of three integers.

Recall the proof of universal statements in section 2.2.3, perhaps of the

form ∀𝑥(𝑃(𝑥) → 𝑄(𝑥)). Again, we will want to assume 𝑃(𝑥) is true and
deduce 𝑄(𝑥). But what about the 𝑥? We want this to work for all 𝑥. This is
done by defining 𝑥 to be an arbitrary element.

Also, it has been mentioned in section 4.3.2 that in order to prove that a
universal statement is wrong, a counterexample is needed.

13
Example 16

Prove that the divisibility property of integers is transitive. This means

that; for all integers 𝑎, 𝑏, and c, if 𝑎 | 𝑏 and 𝑏 | 𝑐, then 𝑎 | 𝑐.

Solution

For all integers 𝑎, 𝑏, and 𝑐, if 𝑎 | 𝑏 and 𝑏 | 𝑐, then 𝑎 | 𝑐.

Starting Point: Suppose a, b, and c are particular but arbitrarily chosen

integers such that 𝑎 | 𝑏 and 𝑏 | 𝑐.
To Show: 𝑎 | 𝑐. You need to show that 𝑎 | 𝑐, or, in other words, that
𝑐 = 𝑎 × (𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑒𝑟).

But since 𝑎 | 𝑏, 𝑏 = 𝑎𝑟 for some integer 𝑟.

And since 𝑏 | 𝑐, 𝑐 = 𝑏𝑠 for some integer 𝑠.

Thus, you will have an equation that expresses c in terms of a.

𝑐 = 𝑏𝑠 by equation 2.4.2

= (𝑎𝑟)𝑠 by equation 2.4.1.

But (𝑎𝑟)𝑠 = 𝑎(𝑟𝑠) by the associative law for multiplication. Hence,

𝑐 = 𝑎(𝑟𝑠). ∎

Now you are almost finished. You have expressed 𝑐 as 𝑎 × (something).

It remains only to verify that that something is an integer. But of course,
it is, because it is a product of two integers.

14
 Theorem 2.4.1

• For all integers 𝑎, 𝑏, and c, if 𝑎 | 𝑏 and 𝑏 | 𝑐, then 𝑎 | 𝑐.

Proof

• Suppose a, b, and c are arbitrary chosen integers such that 𝑎

divides 𝑏 and 𝑏 divides 𝑐.
• By definition of divisibility,
𝑏 = 𝑎𝑟 and 𝑐 = 𝑏𝑠 for some integers 𝑟 and 𝑠.
• By substitution
𝑐 = 𝑏𝑠
= (𝑎𝑟)𝑠
= 𝑎(𝑟𝑠) by basic algebra.
• Let 𝑘 = 𝑟𝑠. Then 𝑘 is an integer since it is a product of integers,
and therefore

𝑐 = 𝑎𝑘 where 𝑘 is an integer.

• Thus, 𝑎 divides 𝑐 by definition of divisibility. ∎

Example 17

Show whether this statement is true or false;

For all integers 𝑎 and 𝑏, if 𝑎 | 𝑏 and 𝑏 | 𝑎 then 𝑎 = 𝑏.

Solution

Let 𝑎 = 2 and 𝑏 = −2
Then, 𝑎|𝑏since2|(−2) and b|a since (−2)|2,
but a ≠ b since 2 ≠ −2
Therefore, the statement is false.

15
The search for a proof will frequently help you discover counterexample
(provided the statement you are trying to prove is, in fact, false).
Conversely, in trying to find a counterexample for a statement, you may
come to realize the reason why it is true (if it is, in fact, true).

Unique Factorization Theorem

Because of its importance, this theorem is also called the fundamental

theorem of arithmetic. The unique factorization theorem says that any
integer greater than 1 either is prime or can be written as a product of
prime numbers in a way that is unique except, perhaps, for the order in
which the primes are written.

Theorem 2.4.2

• Given any integer 𝑛 > 1, there exist a positive integer k,

distinct prime numbers 𝑝1, 𝑝2, … , 𝑝𝑘 , and positive
integers 𝑒1, 𝑒2, … , 𝑒𝑘 such that:
𝑛 = 𝑝1𝑒1 𝑝2𝑒2 𝑝3𝑒3 … 𝑝𝑘 𝑒𝑘
• and any other expression for 𝑛 as a product of prime
numbers is identical to this except for the order in which
the factors are written.
• Standard factored form: 𝑝1 < 𝑝2 < ··· < 𝑝𝑘

Example 18 Use the Unique Factorization to Solve the Problem;

Suppose m is an integer such that;

(8 .7.6 .5 .4 .3 .2 𝑚 ) = 17.16.15.14.13.12.11.10

Does 17|𝑚?

Solution

Since 17 is one of the prime factors of the right-hand side of the equation,
it is also a prime factor of the left-hand side (by the unique factorization
theorem). But 17 does not equal any prime factor of 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, or 2 .
Hence 17 must occur as one of the prime factors of 𝑚, and so 17|𝑚.

16
2.5 REPRESENTATION OF INTEGERS (DEFINITIONS AND METHODS OF PROOF IV)

When you divide 11 by 4, you get a quotient of 2 and a remainder of 3.

Another way to say this is that 11 equals 2 groups of 4 with 3 left over.

The quotient-remainder theorem says that when any integer n is divided

by any positive integer 𝑑 , the result is 𝑎 quotient 𝑞 and 𝑎 nonnegative
remainder 𝑟 that is smaller than 𝑑.

The Quotient-Remainder Theorem

Theorem 2.5.1

• Given any integer 𝑛 and positive integer 𝑑, there exist

unique integers 𝑞 and 𝑟 such that
• 𝑛 = 𝑑𝑞 + 𝑟 and 0 ≤ 𝑟 < 𝑑.

Example 19

• 54 = 52 + 2 = 4 · 13 + 2;

Hence 𝑞 = 13 and 𝑟 = 2

• −54 = −56 + 2 = 4 · (−14) + 2;

Hence 𝑞 = −14 and 𝑟 = 2

17
 Mod and Div

• Given a nonnegative integer 𝑛 and a positive integer 𝑑,

• 𝑛 𝒅𝒊𝒗 𝑑 = the integer quotient obtained when
𝑛 is divided by 𝑑
• 𝑛 𝒎𝒐𝒅 𝑑 = the integer remainder obtained when
𝑛 is divided by 𝑑.
• Symbolically, if 𝑛 and 𝑑 are positive integers, then
𝑛 𝒅𝒊𝒗 𝑑 = 𝑞 and 𝑛 𝒎𝒐𝒅 𝑑 = 𝑟 ↔ 𝑛 = 𝑑𝑞 + 𝑟
• where 𝑞 and 𝑟 are integers and 0 ≤ r < d.

Example 20

Compute 32 div 9 and 32 mod 9.

Solution

Thus 32 𝒅𝒊𝒗 9 = 3 and 32 𝒎𝒐𝒅 9 = 5.

Example 21

Suppose today is Tuesday, and neither this year nor next year is a leap
year. What day of the week will it be 1 year from today?

Solution

There are 365 days in a year that is not a leap year, and each week has 7
days. Now 365 𝒅𝒊𝒗 7 = 52 and 365 𝒎𝒐𝒅 7 = 1.

because 365 = 52 . 7 + 1. Thus 52 weeks, or 364 days, from today will

be a Tuesday, and so 365 days from today will be 1 day later, namely
Wednesday.

18
2.5.1 DIVISION INTO CASES

The division into cases in a proof is like the transfer of control for an if-
then-else statement in a computer program. If m is even, control transfers
to case 1; if not, control transfers to case 2. For any given integer, only
one of the cases will apply. You must consider both cases, however, to
obtain a proof that is valid for an arbitrarily given integer whether even
or not.

Suppose that at some stage of developing a proof, you know that a

statement of the form

𝐴1 𝑜𝑟𝐴2 𝑜𝑟𝐴3 𝑜𝑟 … 𝑜𝑟𝐴𝑖 ….

is true, and suppose you want to deduce a conclusion C. By definition of

or, you know that at least one of the statements 𝐴𝑖 is true (although you
may not know which). In this situation, you should use the method of
division into cases. First assume 𝐴1 is true and deduce C; next assume 𝐴2
is true and deduce C; and so forth until you have assumed 𝐴𝑖 , is true and
deduced C. At that point, you can conclude that regardless of which
statement 𝐴𝑖 happens to be true, the truth of C follows.

Example 22

Prove that given any two consecutive integers, one is even and the other
is odd.

Solution

Two integers are called consecutive if, and only if, one is one more than
the other. So, if one integer is m, the next consecutive integer is m + 1.

To prove the given statement, start by supposing that you have two
particulars but arbitrarily chosen consecutive integers. If the smaller is
m, then the larger will be m + 1. How do you know for sure that one of
these is even and the other is odd? You might imagine some examples: 4,
5; 12, 13; 1,073, 1,074. In the first two examples, the smaller of the two
integers is even and the larger is odd; in the last example, it is the reverse.

19
These observations suggest dividing the analysis into two cases.

Case 1: The smaller of the two integers is even.

Case 2: The smaller of the two integers is odd.
In the first case, when 𝑚 is even, it appears that the next consecutive
integer is odd. Is this always true? If an integer 𝑚 is even, must 𝑚 + 1
necessarily be odd? Of course, the answer is yes. Because if 𝑚 is even,
then 𝑚 = 2𝑘 for some integer 𝑘 , and so 𝑚 + 1 = 2𝑘 + 1, which is
odd.

In the second case, when m is odd, it appears that the next consecutive
integer is even.

Is this always true? If an integer 𝑚 is odd, must 𝑚 + 1 necessarily be

even? Again, the answer is yes. For if 𝑚 is odd, then 𝑚 = 2k + 1 for some
integer k, and so 𝑚 + 1 = (2k + 1) + 1 = 2k + 2 = 2(k + 1), which is even.

Theorem 2.5.1

• Any two consecutive integers have opposite parity..

Proof

Suppose that two consecutive integers are given; call them 𝑚 and 𝑚 +
1. [We must show that one of 𝑚 and 𝑚 + 1 is even and that the other
is odd.]
Case I (𝑚 is even): In this case, 𝑚 = 2𝑘 for some integer 𝑘 , and so
𝑚 + 1 = 2𝑘 + 1,
which is odd [by definition]. Hence in this case, one of 𝑚 and 𝑚 + 1 is
even and the other is odd.
Case 2 (23
Example 𝑚 is odd): In this case, 𝑚 = 2𝑘 + 1 for some integer k, and
so 𝑚 + 1 = (2𝑘 + 1) + 1 = 2𝑘 + 2 = 2(𝑘 + 1) . But 𝑘 + 1 is
an integer
Example 24because it is a sum of two integers. Therefore, 𝑚 + 1 equals
twice some integer, and thus 𝑚 + 1 is even.
Hence in this case also, one of m and m + 1 is even and the other is odd.
It follows that regardless of which case actually occurs for the
particular m and 𝑚 + 1 that are chosen, one of 𝑚 and 𝑚 + 1 is even
and the other is odd.∎ 20
Example 23

Show that any integer can be written in one of the four forms;

𝑛 = 4𝑞 𝑜𝑟 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 1 𝑜𝑟 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 2 𝑜𝑟 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 3

for some integer 𝑞.

Solution

Given any integer 𝑛, apply the quotient-remainder theorem to 𝑛 with 𝑑 =

4. This implies that there exist an integer quotient q and a remainder r
such that

𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 𝑟 and 0 ≤ 𝑟 < 4.

But the only nonnegative remainders 𝑟 that are less than 4 are 0, 1, 2, and
3. Hence, 𝑛 = 4𝑞 or 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 1 or 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 2 or 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 3

for some integer 𝑞.

Example 24

Prove that the square of any odd integer has the form 8𝑚 + 1 for some
integer 𝑚.

Solution
Formal Restatement: ∀ odd integers 𝑛, ∃ an integer 𝑚 such that 𝑛2 =
8𝑚 + 1.

Starting Point: Suppose 𝑛 is a particular but arbitrarily chosen odd integer.

To Show: ∃ an integer 𝑚 such that 𝑛2 = 8𝑚 + 1.
You can think of the problem as follows. Since 𝑛 is odd, you could
represent 𝑛 as 2𝑞 + 1 for some integer 𝑞. Then 𝑛2 = (2𝑞 + 1)2 = 4𝑞 2 +
4𝑞 + 1 = 4(𝑞2 + 𝑞) + 1. It is clear from this analysis that 𝑛2 can be written
in the form 4m + 1, but it may not be clear that it can be written as 8𝑚 +
1. This does not help us to reach the solution.

21
Yet another possibility is to use the result of Example 23. That example
showed that any integer can be written in one of the four forms 𝑛 = 4𝑞 or
𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 1 or 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 2 or 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 3. Two of these, 4𝑞 + 1 and 4𝑞 + 3,
are odd. Thus, any odd integer can be written in the form 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 1 or
𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 3 for some integer 𝑞. You could try breaking into cases based on
these two different forms. It turns out that this last possibility works! In
each of the two cases, the conclusion follows readily by direct calculation.
The details are shown in the following formal proof:

Theorem 2.5.2
• The square of any odd integer has the form 8m + 1 for
some integer m.

Proof
Suppose n is an odd integer. By the quotient-remainder theorem, n can be written
in one of the forms 4𝑞 or 4 𝑞 + 1 or 4𝑞 + 2 or 4𝑞 + 3 for some integer 𝑞. In fact,
since 𝑛 is odd and 4𝑞 𝑎𝑛𝑑 4𝑞 + 2 are even, n must have one of the forms 4𝑞 +
1 or 4𝑞 + 3.
Case 1 (𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 1 for some integer q): [find an integer 𝑚 such that 𝑛2 = 8𝑚 + 1.]
Since 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 1,
𝑛2 = (4𝑞 + 1)2 by substitution
= (4𝑞 + 1) (4𝑞 + 1) by definition of square
= 16𝑞 2 + 8𝑞 + 1
= 8(2𝑞 2 + 𝑞) + 1 by the laws of algebra.
2
Let 𝑚 = 2𝑞 + 𝑞. Then 𝑚 is an integer since 2 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑞 are integers and sums and
products of integers are integers. Thus, substituting, 𝑛2 = 8𝑚 + 1 where 𝑚 is
an integer.
Case 2 (𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 3 for some integer q): [find an integer 𝑚 such that 𝑛2 = 8𝑚 + 3.]
Since 𝑛 = 4𝑞 + 3,
𝑛2 = (4𝑞 + 3)2 by substitution
= (4𝑞 + 3) (4𝑞 + 3) by definition of square
= 16𝑞 2 + 24𝑞 + 9
= 8(2𝑞 2 + 3𝑞) + 8 + 1
= 8(2𝑞 2 + 3𝑞 + 1) + 1 by the laws of algebra.

Let 𝑚 = 2𝑞 2 + 3𝑞 + 1. Then 𝑚 is an integer since 1, 2, 3, and 𝑞 are integers and

sums and products of integers are integers. Thus, substituting, 𝑛2 = 8𝑚 + 1
where 𝑚 is an integer. Cases 1 and 2 show that given any odd integer, whether of
the form 4𝑞 + 1 or 4𝑞 + 3, 𝑛2 = 8𝑚 + 1 for some integer 𝑚.

22
2.6 FLOOR AND CEILING (DEFINITIONS AND METHODS OF PROOF V)
The floor and ceiling of the number are the integers to the immediate left
and to the immediate right of the number (unless the number is, itself, an
integer, in which case its floor and ceiling both equal the number itself).
Many computer languages have built-in functions that compute floor and
ceiling automatically. These functions are very convenient to use when
writing certain kinds of computer programs. In addition, the concepts of
floor and ceiling are important in analyzing the efficiency of many
computer algorithms.

Floor

• The floor of a real number 𝑥, 𝑥 , is a unique integer 𝑛 such

that 𝑛 ≤ 𝑥 < 𝑛 + 1: 𝑥 ⟷ 𝑛 ≤ 𝑥 < 𝑛 + 1

Ceiling
• The ceiling of a real number 𝑥 , 𝑥 , is a unique integer 𝑛
such that 𝑛 − 1 < 𝑥 ≤ 𝑛: 𝑥 = 𝑛 ⟷ 𝑛 − 1 < 𝑥 ≤ 𝑛

Example 25

• 25/4 = 6.25, where 6 < 6.25 < 7. Then ⌊25/4⌋ = 6 and ⌈25/4⌉ = 7
• 0.999, where 0 < 0.999 < 1. Then ⌊0.999⌋ = 0 and ⌈0.999⌉ = 1
• −2.01, since −3 < −2.01 < −2. Then ⌊−2.01⌋ = −3 and ⌈−2.01⌉ = −2
23
Example 26

The 1,370 students at a college are given the opportunity to take buses to an
out-of-town game. Each bus holds a maximum of 40 passengers.

a. For reasons of economy, the athletic director will send only full buses.
What is the maximum number of buses the athletic director will send?

b. If the athletic director is willing to send one partially filled bus, how
many buses will be needed to allow all the students to take the trip?

Solution

a. ⌊1370/40⌋ = ⌊34.25⌋ = 34 b. ⌈1370/40⌉ = ⌈34.25⌉ = 35

Example 27

If k is an integer, what are ⌊𝑘⌋ and ⌊𝑘 + 1/2⌋? Why?

Solution

Suppose k is an integer. Then

⌊𝑘⌋ = k because k is an integer and 𝑘 ≤ 𝑘 < 𝑘 + 1,

And ⌊𝑘 + 1/2⌋= k because k is an integer and 𝑘 ≤ 𝑘 + 1/2 < 𝑘 + 1.

Example 28 Proving a property of floor using Direct Method

Prove that for all real numbers 𝑥 , if m is an integer, then ⌊𝑥 + 𝑚⌋ = ⌊𝑥⌋ + 𝑚.

Solution

Begin by supposing that 𝑥 is a particular but arbitrarily chosen real

number and that m is a particular but arbitrarily chosen integer. You
must show that ⌊𝑥 + 𝑚⌋ = ⌊𝑥⌋ + 𝑚.. Since this is an equation involving
⌊𝑥⌋ and ⌊𝑥 + 𝑚⌋. it is reasonable to give one of these quantities a name:
Let n =⌊𝑥⌋ . By definition of floor, n is an integer and 𝑛 ≤ 𝑥 < 𝑛 + 1.

24
This double inequality enables you to compute the value of ⌊𝑥 + 𝑚⌋ in
terms of 𝑛 by adding m to all sides:

𝑛 + 𝑚 ≤ 𝑥 + 𝑚 < 𝑛 + 𝑚 + 1.

Thus, the left-hand side of the equation to be shown is

⌊𝑥 + 𝑚⌋ = 𝑛 + 𝑚.

On the other hand, since 𝑛 = ⌊𝑥⌋, the right-hand side of the equation to
be shown is ⌊𝑥⌋ + 𝑚 = 𝑛 + 𝑚 also. Thus, ⌊𝑥 + 𝑚⌋ = ⌊𝑥⌋ + 𝑚 . This
discussion is summarized as follows:

Theorem 2.6.1

• ∀ real numbers 𝑥, if 𝑚 is an integer, then 𝑥 + 𝑚 = 𝑥 + 𝑚 .

Proof

Thus, ⌊𝑥 + 𝑚⌋ = ⌊𝑥⌋ + 𝑚. ∎
25
Example 29 Proving a property of floor by using Division into Cases
𝑛
𝑛
𝑛 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛
Prove that for any integer 𝑛, ⌊ ⌋ = { 2𝑛−1
2
𝑛 𝑜𝑑𝑑
2

Solution
Theorem 2.6.2
𝑛Τ 𝑛 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛
𝑛 2
• for any integer n, = { (𝑛−1)
2 ൗ2 𝑛 𝑜𝑑𝑑

Proof

26
Example 30 Disproving a property by counterexample

Is the following statement true or false?

For all real numbers 𝑥 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦, ⌊𝑥 + 𝑦⌋ = ⌊ 𝑥⌋ + ⌊𝑦⌋.

Solution

The statement is false. As a counterexample, take x = y = 1ൗ2

Then ⌊𝑥⌋ + ⌊𝑦⌋ = ⌊1ൗ2⌋ + ⌊1ൗ2⌋ = 0 + 0 = 0.

Whereas ⌊𝑥 + 𝑦⌋ = ⌊1ൗ2 + 1ൗ2⌋ = ⌊1⌋ = 1.

Hence ⌊𝑥 + 𝑦⌋ ≠ ⌊𝑥⌋ + ⌊𝑦⌋.

To arrive at this counterexample, you could have reasoned as follows: Suppose

𝑥 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦 are real numbers. Must it necessarily be the case that ⌊𝑥 + 𝑦⌋ =
⌊ 𝑥⌋ + ⌊𝑦⌋. , or could 𝑥 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦 be such that ⌊𝑥 + 𝑦⌋ ≠ ⌊𝑥⌋ + ⌊𝑦⌋ ? Imagine
values that the various quantities could take. For instance, if both 𝑥 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦 are
positive, then ⌊ 𝑥⌋ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 ⌊𝑦⌋ are the integer parts of ⌊ 𝑥⌋ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 ⌊𝑦⌋ respectively. Just
as,

so is 𝑥 = ⌊ 𝑥⌋ + fractional part of x

and 𝑦 = ⌊𝑦⌋+ fractional part of y.

where the term fractional part is understood here to mean the part of the
number to the right of the decimal point when the number is written in decimal
notation. Thus, if 𝑥 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦 are positive,

⌊𝑥 + 𝑦⌋ = ⌊ 𝑥⌋ + ⌊𝑦⌋.+ the sum of the fractional parts of 𝑥 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦.

But also

⌊𝑥 + 𝑦⌋ = ⌊𝑥 + 𝑦⌋ + the fractional part of (𝑥 + 𝑦).

These equations show that if there exist numbers x and y such that the sum of
the fractional parts of 𝑥 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦 is at least 1, then a counterexample can be found.
27
2.7 CLASSICAL THEOREMS (DEFINITIONS AND METHODS OF PROOF VI)
This section contains proofs of two of the most famous theorems in
mathematics: The first one is that √2 is irrational (discovered by the Greek)
and the second one is that there are infinitely many prime numbers (discovered
by Euclid). Both proofs are examples of indirect arguments and were well
known more than 2,000 years ago, but they remain models of mathematical
argument to this day.

2.7.1 PROOF BY CONTRADICTION

Proof by contradiction is indicated if you want to show that there is no

object with a certain property, or if you want to show that a certain object
does not have a certain property. The next two examples illustrate these
situations.

Example 30 Use proof by contradiction to show that there is no greatest

integer.

Solution For the proof, the “certain property” is the property of being the
greatest integer. To prove that there is no object with this property, begin
by supposing the negation: that there is an object with the property.

Starting Point: Suppose not. Suppose there is a greatest integer; call it N.

This means that N ≥ n for all integers n.

28
 Theorem 2.7.1.1

• There is no greatest integer.

Proof
[We take the negation of the theorem and suppose it to be true.]
Suppose not. That is, suppose there is a greatest integer N. [We must
deduce a contradiction.] Then N ≥ n for every integer n. Let M = N + 1.
Now M is an integer since it is a sum of integers. Also, M > N since M =
N + 1. Thus, M is an integer that is greater than N. So N is the greatest
integer and N is not the greatest integer, which is a contradiction. [This
contradiction shows that the supposition is false and hence, that the
theorem is true.].∎

Example 31 Use proof by contradiction to show that no integer can be

both even and odd.
Solution

Theorem 2.7.1.2

• There is no integer that can be both even and odd.

Proof
[We take the negation of the theorem and suppose it to be true.]
Suppose not. That is, suppose there is at least one integer n that is both
even and odd. [We must deduce a contradiction.] By definition of even,
n = 2a for some integer a, and by definition of odd,
n = 2b + 1 for some integer b.
Consequently,
2a = 2b + 1 by equating the two expressions for n
and so
2a − 2 b = 1
2(a − b) = 1
a − b = 1/2 by algebra.
Now since a and b are integers, the difference a − b must also be an
integer. But a − b = 1/2, and 1/2 is not an integer. Thus a − b is an
integer and a − b is not an integer, which is a contradiction. [This
contradiction shows that the supposition is false and, hence, that the
29
theorem is true.] ∎
Example 32 Use the proof by contradiction to show that the sum of any
rational number and any irrational number is irrational.

Solution

Theorem 2.7.1.3

• The sum of any rational number and any irrational number

is irrational.

Proof
[We take the negation of the theorem and suppose it to be true.]
Suppose not. That is, suppose there is a rational number r and an
irrational number s such that r + s is rational. [We must deduce a
contradiction.] By definition of rational, r = a/b and r + s = c/d for
some integers a, b, c, and d with b ≠ 0 and d ≠ 0. By substitution,
𝑎 𝑐
+𝑠 =
𝑏 𝑑

and so,
𝑐 𝑎 𝑎
𝑠 = − by subtracting from both sides
Example 32 𝑑 𝑏 𝑏

𝑐𝑏−𝑎𝑑
= by the laws of algebra.
𝑏𝑑
Now bc − ad and bd are both integers [since a, b, c, and d are integers
and since products and differences of integers are integers], and bd ≠
0 [by the zero-product property].
Hence s is a quotient of the two integers bc − ad and bd with bd ≠ 0.
Thus, by definition of rational, s is rational, which contradicts the
supposition that s is irrational.
[Hence the supposition is false and the theorem is true.]∎

30
Example 33 Classical Theorem 1:

√2 is irrational.

Solution

This is one of classical examples of proof by contradiction.

Theorem 2.7.1.4

• 2 is irrational.
Proof
[We take the negation of the theorem and suppose it to be true.]
Suppose not. Then √2 is equal to a fraction a/b. Without loss of
generality, assume a/b is in lowest terms (otherwise reduce the
fraction). So,

2 = a2 Τ𝑏 2

And,

2𝑏 2 = a2

Thus a2 is even, and as such a is even (Theorem 2.7.1.2).

a=2k for some integer k, and a2 =4𝑘 2 . We then have,
So, 32
Example
2𝑏 2 =4𝑘 2

𝑏 2 =2𝑘 2

Thus, 𝑏 2 is even, and as such b is even. Since a is also even, we see

that a/b is not in lowest terms, a contradiction. Thus, is √2
irrational.∎

31
Example 34 Classical Theorem 2:

The set of prime numbers is infinite.

Solution

Theorem 2.7.1.4

• There are infinitely many primes.

Proof
[We take the negation of the theorem and suppose it to be true.]
Suppose not. That is, suppose the set of prime numbers is finite.
[We must deduce a contradiction.] Then some prime number p is
the largest of all the prime numbers,

and hence we can list the prime numbers in ascending order:

2, 3, 5, 7, 11, . . ., p.

Let N be the product of all the prime numbers plus 1:

N = (2·3·5·7·11· · ·p) + 1
Example 32
N is not divisible by any of the prime numbers in the list

2, 3, 5, 7, 11, . . ., p (there is always a remainder 1)

N is either a prime number or divisible by a prime number that is

not in the list. In either of the two cases, this means that the list
does not contain all primes.

Hence, the list of prime numbers is not finite and this is a

contradiction to the assumption that the list is finite.∎

[Therefore, the supposition is false and the theorem is true.]

32
2.7.2 PROOF BY CONTRAPOSITION

A second form of indirect argument, argument by contraposition, is based

on the logical equivalence between a statement and its contrapositive. To
prove a statement by contraposition, you take the contrapositive of the
statement, prove the contrapositive by a direct proof, and conclude that
the original statement is true.

Example 35

Is the statement “for all integers 𝑛, if 𝑛2 is even, then 𝑛 is even” true?

Solution

A direct proof of this statement would require fixing an arbitrary 𝑛 and

assuming that 𝑛2 is even. But it is not at all clear how this would allow us
to conclude anything about 𝑛 . Just because 𝑛2 =2k does not in itself
suggest how we could write 𝑛 as a multiple of 2.

Try something else: write the contrapositive of the statement. We get, for
all integers 𝑛, if 𝑛 is odd then 𝑛2 is odd. This looks much more promising.

33
 Theorem 2.7.2.1

• For all integers n, if n2 is even, then n is even.

Proof
[We take the negation of the theorem and suppose it to be true.]
Let n be an arbitrary integer. Suppose that n is not even, and thus odd.
Then,
n=2k+1 for some integer k.
Now,
n2=(2k+1)2=4k2+4k+1=2(2k2+2k)+1

Since 2k2+2k is an integer, we see that n2 is odd and therefore not

even. Thus, the contrapositive statement is proved to be true.

Example 36 Prove: for all integers a and b, if a+b is odd, then a is odd
or b is odd.

Solution

Trying a direct proof will be difficult because it will be hard to

separate a and b from knowing something about a+b. On the other hand,
if we know something about a and b separately, then combining them
might give us information about a+b.

The contrapositive of the statement we are trying to prove is: for all
integers a and b, if a and b are even (De Morgan’s Law of union),
then a+b is even. Thus, our proof will have the following format:

Let a and b be integers. Assume that a and b are both even (not odd).
Therefore a+b is even (not odd).

Here is a complete proof:

34
Let a and b be integers. Assume that a and b are even. Then, a=2k
and b=2l for some integers k and l.

Now a+b=2k+2l=2(k+l). Since k+l is an integer, we see that a+b is even.

Example 37 use contrapositive proof to show that for every prime

number p, if p≠2, then p is odd.

Solution

Let p be an arbitrary prime number. Assume p is not odd. So, p is divisible

by 2. Since p is prime, it must have exactly two divisors, and it has 2 as a
divisor, so p must be divisible by only 1 and 2. Therefore p=2. This
completes the proof (by contrapositive).

35