TAEuler
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
Assume there is a largest even number, E.

E+2 would also be even, as E must be divisible by 2, so E+2 is divisible by 2, and clearly greater than E.

If E is the largest even number, then −E is the largest negative even number.

−E−2 would also be even, as −E must be divisible by 2, so −E−2 is divisible by 2, and clearly -E - 2 is a greater negative even number than E

Therefore, this contradicts the original assumption, so it must be incorrect.

Therefore, there is an infinite number of even numbers.

Is this proof sufficient, or is something missing? As the textbook's answer was much longer.

EDIT: Textbook's answer is: Suppose that there is a finte number N of even numbers

This finite list can be ordered so that E1 < E2 < E3 < ... < En

Then the largest even number is En

But 2En would also be even and clearly greater than En, so is not in the list.

Therefore, there are more than N even numbers.

This contradicts the initial proposition.

Therefore, there are infinitely many even numbers
0
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
whats the question?
0
reply
mqb2766
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
(Original post by TAEuler)
Assume there is a largest even number, E.

E+2 would also be even, as E must be divisible by 2, so E+2 is divisible by 2, and clearly greater than E.

If E is the largest even number, then −E is the largest negative even number.

−E−2 would also be even, as −E must be divisible by 2, so −E−2 is divisible by 2, and clearly -E - 2 is a greater negative even number than E

Therefore, this contradicts the original assumption, so it must be incorrect.

Therefore, there is an infinite number of even numbers.

Is this proof sufficient, or is something missing? As the textbook's answer was much longer.

EDIT: Textbook's answer is: Suppose that there is a finte number N of even numbers

This finite list can be ordered so that E1 < E2 < E3 < ... < En

Then the largest even number is En

But 2En would also be even and clearly greater than En, so is not in the list.

Therefore, there are more than N even numbers.

This contradicts the initial proposition.

Therefore, there are infinitely many even numbers
The textbook must assume the Es are positive? Otherwise 2En < En
0
reply
RDKGames
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
(Original post by TAEuler)
Assume there is a largest even number, E.

E+2 would also be even, as E must be divisible by 2, so E+2 is divisible by 2, and clearly greater than E.

If E is the largest even number, then −E is the largest negative even number.

−E−2 would also be even, as −E must be divisible by 2, so −E−2 is divisible by 2, and clearly -E - 2 is a greater negative even number than E

Therefore, this contradicts the original assumption, so it must be incorrect.

Therefore, there is an infinite number of even numbers.

Is this proof sufficient, or is something missing? As the textbook's answer was much longer.

EDIT: Textbook's answer is: Suppose that there is a finte number N of even numbers

This finite list can be ordered so that E1 < E2 < E3 < ... < En

Then the largest even number is En

But 2En would also be even and clearly greater than En, so is not in the list.

Therefore, there are more than N even numbers.

This contradicts the initial proposition.

Therefore, there are infinitely many even numbers
Textbook's answer doesn't seem longer...?

But yes, your proof is sufficient. You didn't need to dip into the negatives though.
0
reply
DFranklin
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by TAEuler)
Assume there is a largest even number, E.

E+2 would also be even, as E must be divisible by 2, so E+2 is divisible by 2, and clearly greater than E.

If E is the largest even number, then −E is the largest negative even number.

−E−2 would also be even, as −E must be divisible by 2, so −E−2 is divisible by 2, and clearly -E - 2 is a greater negative even number than E

Therefore, this contradicts the original assumption, so it must be incorrect.

Therefore, there is an infinite number of even numbers.

Is this proof sufficient, or is something missing? As the textbook's answer was much longer.

EDIT: Textbook's answer is: Suppose that there is a finte number N of even numbers

This finite list can be ordered so that E1 < E2 < E3 < ... < En

Then the largest even number is En

But 2En would also be even and clearly greater than En, so is not in the list.

Therefore, there are more than N even numbers.

This contradicts the initial proposition.

Therefore, there are infinitely many even numbers
At this level (i.e. for a problem this simple), I think you do need to make some kind of comment about "if there's a finite number of even numbers, then there must be a largest even number".
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you confident you could find support for your mental health if you needed it in COVID-19?

Yes (101)
22.3%
No (352)
77.7%

Watched Threads

View All