I am trying to prove cancellation property of multiplication of natural numbers, $xy=xz$ implies $y=z$, with Peano axioms and arithmetic but not using or defining order on natural numbers. It can be done for addition. But for proving multiplication cancellation property one uses order. Why is that so?
2026-03-25 15:47:04.1774453624
Multiplication cancellation property by Peano axioms
915 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in PEANO-AXIOMS
- Difference between provability and truth of Goodstein's theorem
- How Can the Peano Postulates Be Categorical If They Have NonStandard Models?
- Show that PA can prove the pigeon-hole principle
- Peano Axioms and loops
- Is it true that $0\in 1$?
- Is there a weak set theory that can prove that the natural numbers is a model of PA?
- Exercises and solutions for natural deduction proofs in Robinson and Peano arithmetic
- Proof of Strong Induction Using Well-Ordering Principle
- Some questions about the successor function
- Prove addition is commutative using axioms, definitions, and induction
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
You do not need to use order. Do it by induction on $y$. Define $M:=\{y \ |yx=zx\Rightarrow y=z \}$.
For $y=1$ we have $1\cdot x=z\cdot x$. If $z=1$ we are done. Suppose $z\neq 1$. Then $z=s(p)$ for some $p$ and hence $$1\cdot x=s(p)\cdot x= px+x=(p\cdot x)+1\cdot x$$ and $$1+(1\cdot x)=1+(p\cdot x)+(1\cdot x).$$ Using cancellation for addition we get $$1=1+(p\cdot x)=(p\cdot x)+1=s(p\cdot x),$$ that is a contradiction. Therefore $z=1$.
Now, let $y=k\in M$, i.e. for any positive integers $z,x$ if $kx=zx$ then $k=z$. Let $t,s \in \mathbb{N}_+$ be such that $s(k)\cdot s=t\cdot s$. We show that $s(k)=t$. Obviously $t\neq 1$. Hence $t=s(m)$ for some $m$ and therefore we get $$s(k)s=s(m)s$$ that is equaivalent to $$ks+s=ms+s$$ from which it follows that $ks=ms$ (cancellation for addition). From the induction hypothesis we have $k=m$, and therefore $s(k)=s(m)=t$.
That means that $n=k+1\in M$ and the proof is completed.