Example of A Provable Identity
Since the axioms seem to list all the basic facts about the operations in question it is not immediately obvious that there should be anything one can state using only the three operations that is not provably true. However, proving seemingly innocuous statements can require long proofs using only the above eleven axioms. Consider the following proof that (x + 1)2 = x2 + 2 · x + 1:
- (x + 1)2
- = (x + 1)1 + 1
- = (x + 1)1 · (x + 1)1 by 9.
- = (x + 1) · (x + 1) by 8.
- = (x + 1) · x + (x + 1) · 1 by 6.
- = x · (x + 1) + x + 1 by 4. and 3.
- = x · x + x · 1 + x · 1 + 1 by 6. and 3.
- = x1 · x1 + x · (1 + 1) + 1 by 8. and 6.
- = x1 + 1 + x · 2 + 1 by 9.
- = x2 + 2 · x + 1 by 4.
Here brackets are omitted when axiom 2. tells us that there is no confusion about grouping.
The length of proofs is not an issue; proofs of similar identities to that above for things like (x + y)100 would take a lot of lines, but would really involve little more than the above proof.
Read more about this topic: Tarski's High School Algebra Problem
Famous quotes containing the word identity:
“One of the most highly valued functions of used parents these days is to be the villains of their children’s lives, the people the child blames for any shortcomings or disappointments. But if your identity comes from your parents’ failings, then you remain forever a member of the child generation, stuck and unable to move on to an adulthood in which you identify yourself in terms of what you do, not what has been done to you.”
—Frank Pittman (20th century)