
	Where results make sense

Topic: Invalid proof

Related Topics

Division by zero

College logic

Argument from fallacy

Logical fallacy

Ad hominem

List of topics in logic

Division by zero

	Invalid proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		In mathematics, there are a variety of spurious proofs of obvious contradictions.
		In the "proof" above, this is not the case.
		Since division by zero is undefined, the argument is invalid.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Invalid_proof (1058 words)

	Talk:Invalid proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		Mathematically, they are the same number expressed differently (if you take the sum of 9 x 10^-n as n tends to infinity the difference between it and 1 goes as 10^-n, which tends to zero.) So they are equal.
		I think this proof shows that the slope of 1 equals the slope of zero, not that 1=0.
		The "invalid proof" is in fact a valid proof of the statement that the associative law does not hold in general for infinite sums.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Talk:Invalid_proof (975 words)

	A Specification of the Checker
		The top-level specification of the proof checker is a schema that takes as input the components of a proof-object and returns a boolean value which is true or false according to whether the proof recorded in the proof-object is valid or not.
		In terms of the tree model of the proof, the theorem is the root of the tree, open subgoals represent unexpanded nodes at various stages of proof construction, and the criterion for proof completion is that no further node expansion is possible - that is that the proof tree is closed.
		Proof variables occur in the proof itself, while internal variables only occur internally in the checker (including the rules database) and are assumed to be separate from proof variables.
	www.itee.uq.edu.au /~gwat/thesis/chap7.html (8533 words)

	Close Range: A Couple More Cases
		That night, Shirley Knott, who is a competent student in the class, carefully evaluates the proof, and she decides that one of the steps misapplies the rule of universal generalization.
		She is correct that the proof makes this mistake, and she is justified in believing the proof is invalid because she has carefully checked each step against her (carefully taken) notes about how the rules are supposed to be applied.
		So she gives up her belief that the proof is invalid and decides that it is valid, going so far as to alter her own notes on the rule of universal generalization to bring them into line with her new (and faulty) understanding of the invalid proof.
	rationalhunter.typepad.com /close_range/2004/05/a_couple_more_c.html (806 words)

	Fundamental Proof of Static Nuclear Structure and Atomic Physics
		Quantum theory does not have a sufficient scientific basis to preclude the argument of static relative motion of nucleons or to ignore a conclusive proof to the positive of this simple hypothesis.
		Modern theorists are not bothered by their invalidity to the truths of science.
		This inability is not proof that the mechanical situation is mere manifestations of magic values of quantum, as this field of theory states.
	home.earthlink.net /~kdthrge (4018 words)

	On the contrary, I demonstrated that your proof was invalid
		On the contrary, I demonstrated that your proof was invalid
		And although you might continue to dispute what those expectations are, your claims (as are mine) are irrelevant - it worldwide expectations that continue to drive RESULTS that are quite acceptable (at least for the time being) for me and most Chinese (again you can dispute that, not that it will matter either).
		Re: On the contrary, I demonstrated that your proof was invalid
	www.centurychina.com /plaboard/posts/3685755.shtml (196 words)

	[No title] (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		The proof obligations not only assure that the results of the programs are correct, but also guarantee that the programs always terminate for valid input and the implementation invariant holds.
		With the help of the extracted program parts, the old, invalid proof can also be divided into old and new parts.
		Those parts of the old proof which correspond to unchanged parts of the program serve as pattern for a new proof attempt.
	www.dfki.de /siso/vsedemo/html/M105.htm (447 words)

	Invalid techniques of proof
		An issue or two of a journal devoted to your proof is useful.
		We were asked in an exercise to proof this theorem.
		This method of proof is one of the two pillars of modern cryptography.
	www.maths.uwa.edu.au /~berwin/humour/invalid.proofs.html (848 words)

	Walmart sued for refusing to stock Plan B pill - Page 32 - Graffë Forums
		I don't have to post any proof, it is up to Wandor to post proof of his claims because another poster has checked with the source Wandor provided and found the source does not remember speaking to Wandor.
		Using your logic however, Wicerius has not provided any proof to back up his claim that he made the call so the claim is invalid.
		According to your logic you don't have to provide proof when posting quotes from a source, but then according to your "logic" other people have to provide proof when posting quotes from the same source.
	www.graffe.com /forums/showthread.php?p=872392#post872392 (1961 words)

	Anime Scores Forum :: View topic - Invalid Proof Techniques (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		Proof by cumbersome notation in itself is not invalid...unless within the cumbersome notation, another fallacy is involved...most logic classes are taught using "cumbersome notation" to teach logic rules and to distinguish between spoken intent in a statement and the logic it represents...
		Anyways...I'm curious as to what proof the author of this list has to show that these are all invalid...or if this is all suppose to just be accepted by (proof by) appeal to intuition...lol...
		Anyways...I'm curious as to what proof the author of this list has to show that these are all invalid...
	www.animescores.com /forum/viewtopic.php?t=5118 (955 words)

	An Invalid Argument (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		In the sense of formal logic - an 'argument': premises and conclusions (nothing else is looked at) is invalid only if the premises can (in some situation) be true and the conclusion be false (in the same situation).
		The essense of an argument is whether the premises and the conclusion are connected: The situations in which the premises are true are also situations which guarantee that the conclusion is true.
		In this sense a proof is a series of 'arguments', from one step to the next.
	mathcentral.uregina.ca /qq/database/QQ.09.98/redding1.html (105 words)

	The Specification of the Proof Checker
		The second is if the proof object is never examined by this function, but is rejected by code prior to the module which implements the main specification.
		This may be by the parser declaring that the syntax of the proof-object is incorrect, or by the inputs passed to the checking module failing to satisfy the preconditions of that module (for instance there are restrictions on the format of the rules in the database).
		Proof variables can occur in the proof object itself, local variables can only occur internally in the checker and are assumed to be separate from proof variables.
	www.itee.uq.edu.au /~gwat/thesis/appB.html (3810 words)

	[No title]
		F of I.pred (* A predicate argument ) and proof* = Hyp of Input.var (* A hypothesis, introduced with Impi*)
		Impi of Input.var * Input.pred * proof (* bind var to a hypothetical * proof of the pred.
		The last * argument is a proof of the * right hand side, possibly * refering to var ) ( Bind var to a proof of the * negation of pred.
	www.cs.ucla.edu /~rupak/Vampyre/vampyre/src/proof.ml (4463 words)

	The origins of proof
		Now, if a conclusion doesn't follow from its premises, the argument is said to be invalid and no reliable judgement can be made about whether the conclusion is true, regardless of whether or not the premises are true.
		Using his definitions, common notions and postulates as an axiomatic system, Euclid was able to produce deductive proofs of a number of important geometric propositions.
		His axioms and proofs have been a useful set of tools for many subsequent generations of mathematicians, and show how powerful and beneficial deductive reasoning can be!
	plus.maths.org /issue7/features/proof1 (2375 words)

	paul-almond.com - A Refutation of Penrose's Godel-Turing Proof that Computational Artificial Intelligence is Impossible
		Penrose's proof is an important part of his argument against the feasibility of computational AI, but I leave it to the reader to consider the strength of his case after failure of this proof.
		Without this defence to protect Penrose's proof it fails and, unless he can provide another defence (and it would have to be one that is good enough to defeat the actual existence of algorithms that are proved not to exist by proofs which are like his own, but less general) his argument collapses.
		Penrose's attempted proof, and my special case 'proof', appear to allow the existence of algorithms that are 'outside their scope' and are expected to be deemed irrelevant, but this suggests that any reasoning intended to follow on from this and preclude intelligent behaviour in a machine should have similar provisions.
	www.paul-almond.com /RefutationofPenroseGodelTuring.htm (21140 words)

	'Fruit Is Like Mother's Milk'--the Obligate Crank 'Proof'
		The alleged proof is probably the most detailed analysis ever presented by a fruitarian in an attempt to support the claim that fruit is similar to mother's milk.
		That is, if the proof were valid, it would be one of the few pieces of evidence anyone has been able to put forward in support of the "fruit is like mother's milk" theory.
		The claim in the proof that lower covariances for milk and fruit (vs. milk and poultry) suggests the numbers for milk and fruit are lower in magnitude (hence may be "closer" in gross terms) is approximately correct.
	www.beyondveg.com /billings-t/fruit-milk/fruit-milk-appx1.shtml (3695 words)

	Neil Tennant
		A proof is a finite piece of discourse that can be checked mechanically for its correctness, so that no step is left open to dispute or incompatible interpretations.
		A proof must indicate what its starting points (the Premises) are, and what its endpoint (the Conclusion) is. It must make the deductive transition from the former to the latter completely clear, by means of simple and obvious steps that preserve truth.
		The completeness of the first-order system of proof was first established by Kurt Gödel, in his 1929 doctoral dissertation at the University of Vienna.
	people.cohums.ohio-state.edu /tennant9/150.6m.html (988 words)

	[No title]
		Ontologies should have an entry in the registry in order to be linked to the proof during browsing.
		Description: In the current context, the reasoner provides the attributes requered for generating a proof node and the service returns the proof node in the IW format.
		Inconsistencies of the proof node with respect to the current registry are identified by the service.
	www-ksl.stanford.edu /software/IW/snark/iw-snark.lisp (396 words)

	[No title]
		We give an invalid proof of the same fact which illustrates an argument some authors have called the “induction trap”.
		Proof: (Invalid) We prove that for all EMBED Equation.3 : if S is a set of n horses, then all horses in S have the same color.
		Proof: Assume that the statements EMBED Equation.3 and EMBED Equation.3 are true.
	www.cse.ucsc.edu /classes/cmps102/Winter02/induction.doc (3394 words)

	McAfee - Rebate Center
		If your rebate submission is invalid due to missing proof of previous ownership or incorrect submission of proof of previous ownership.
		The acceptable proof is the original product CD diskette #1, title page of manual, or your confirmation e-mail from your downloaded purchase.
		This means that an eligible UPC bar code or Proof of Purchase was not received, or the UPC or Proof of Purchase received was not the correct UPC/Proof of Purchase for the rebate you are requesting.
	www.mcafeerebates.com /promocenter/mcafee/resubmission.shtml (440 words)

	SHORTENED TRUTH TABLE TECHNIQUE
		The shortened truth table technique offers a third possibility for proof which has the advantage of truth tables in that it can give a Y/N answer: the argument is shown to be valid or invalid, but it short cuts the long and tedious nature of the full blown truth table.
		You then "reason backwards" from the assumed truth of the premisses and falsity of the conclusion to try to find a set of truth values to assign to the individual propositions which would make the premisses all come out true and yet the conclusion to be false.
		If possibility b) occurs, your attempt to prove the argument invalid has contradicted itself, your attempt to prove the argument invalid has failed, or in other words it is logically impossible to have all true premisses and a false conclusion; ergo the argument is VALID by reductio ad absurdum.
	www.loyno.edu /~folse/SHORTENEDTT.html (1025 words)

	Caritas Newsletter - Month 1998
		He had to admit that they ordained men to be priests, but he said that the word “priest” was neutered of its true meaning; it was emptied of the Catholic theology of the word.
		Once again, Anglican Orders were condemned to be invalid not because of lack of matter (although that may have also been present), not because of form (although that may have been present) and not because of the intention of the minister (although that may have been present), but because of the defective rite.
		PROOF of Invalid Baptism - from Novus Ordo Ritual
	www.truecatholic.org /car9804.htm (2360 words)

	Show that NN(S) is a subgraph of MST(S)
		A minor flaw is a logical gap in the proof.
		A major flaw in the proof is an assertion that is false.
		An invalid proof is (i) a proof not by contradiction, (ii) an incomplete proof, (iii) the statements do not follow logically, or (iv) something that does not constitute a proof (like merely giving an example).
	www.cs.mcgill.ca /~wkwok/251/251midterm1/node1.html (396 words)

	[No title]
		In the NP proof system, y is the so-called proof that x is a YES-instance.
		A decision problem PI is in NP iff there exists a polynomial "poly" and a proof system -- a system of logic that includes a poly time algorithmic checker for checking proofs -- such that: 1.
		Proof: A poly-time algorithm may be viewed as a system for generating polynomial length proofs of YES and NO. QED There exist problems like INTEGER FACTORIZATION which are in both NP and CoNP but which are not known to be in P. Here are some examples of computational problems.
	www.cs.cmu.edu /afs/cs/academic/class/15451-f04/www/lectures/lect1104.txt (1467 words)

	MT Tech Computer Science - C.S. 3166 (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		The student will be able to examine concepts in mathematics and informatics and distinguish between what should be postulated and what requires proof.
		For proofs on topics covered in the course, the student will be able to recognize the logical differences between a valid proof and an invalid proof.
		The student will be able to write correct proofs by various means (proof by construction, proof by contradiction, proof by induction).
	www.mtech.edu /cs/Courses/cs3166.htm (250 words)

	CS311 Fall 2003 Notes from 9-18-03
		If a proof is invalid, then you need to show a counter-example.
		If you start a proof and then find that it does not work out, this does not prove that there is no possible different way to prove it true.
		For all x[E(4c)] (5) and Universal Generalization (since c is arbitrary, the proof we just did could apply to any c therefore it holds for all integers x) QED.
	www.cs.utk.edu /~booth/311-04/notes/9.18.03.html (1270 words)

	[Dpf] Totalities Including Contradictions and Proof by Contradiction (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		The method of proof by contradiction, also called Reductio ad absurdum (literally ‘reduction to absurdity’), begins a logical proof with a provisional assumption that is a negation of a statement.
		(That it is impossible for both ‘A’ and not ‘A’ to be true.) In symbolic logic, proofs by contradictions are often used within the context of a larger argument.
		Applying proof by contradiction to a world whose totality involves the existence of contradictions may render the proof’s results invalid.
	lists.econ.utah.edu /pipermail/dpf/2004-December/000100.html (367 words)

	The Nature of Objective Reality
		My proofs rely heavily on the reductio ad absurdum technique—that is, assume a proposition is false, show that this leads to a contradiction, therefore the proposition must be true.
		The proof I have given of the above is not merely an existence proof: it is a constructive proof, giving one or more examples of statements that are objectively true.
		The essence of the proof is that any statement about objective reality, in order to be objectively true, must apply equally validly to itself.
	www.geek-central.gen.nz /peeves/objective_reality.html (2819 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)