Existential Statement

Existential Statement is a #202204281244 which states there is at least one thing for which the property is true, given that it could be either true or false. It usually uses existential quantifier \(\exists\) which express there is a, there exists, we can find a, there is at least one, for some and for at least one.

For example: There is a prime number that is even can be denoted in mathematics as \(\exists p \in P \text{ such that } p \text{ is a prime number}\) where \(P\) represents all positive integers, which read There exists a \(p\) in the set of all positive integers such that \(p\) is a prime number.

To prove this, one can just show that at least one \(p\) in the set of \(P\) is true. To prove that the statement is wrong, one could not avoid proving that all of them are false, which is called the method of exhaustion. You can see the difference between it and 202204281245.

The negation of an Existential Statement is logically equivalent# to a 202204281245. Formally, this means that \(\sim (\exists x \in D \text{ such that } Q(x)) \equiv \forall x \in D, \sim Q(x)\). For instance, the negation of the statement “Some books have a cover” is “All books don’t have a cover” or “No books have a cover”. As you have noticed, the negation of it is to disprove every element in the set has the property \(Q(x)\), which is quite similar to the reasoning of the method of exhaustion.

Links to this page
  • Universal Statement

    The negation of a Universal Statement is logically equivalent# to an 202204281254. Formally, this means that \(\sim (\forall x \in D, Q(x)) \equiv \exists x \in D \text{ such that } \sim Q(x)\). For instance, the negation of the statement “All books have a cover” is “There is at least one book which doesn’t have a cover”. It is tempting to say that the negation should be “No books have a cover”, but it is enough to disprove the above statement by just one counterexample.

    To disprove this, one could use counterexample, to show that at least one \(x\) in the set of \(H\) is false. To prove that the statement is true, one could not avoid proving that all of them are true, which is called the method of exhaustion. You can see the difference between it and 202204281254.

  • Universal Conditional Statement

    The negation of it is expressed formally as \(\sim (\forall x, P(x) \rightarrow Q(x)) \equiv \exists x \text{ such that } P(x) \land \sim Q(x)\). Consider the statement “For all computer programs, if it is in Java programming language, then it at least has 5 lines”. Transform to its negated form, that is an 202204281254 that consists of an and statement which could be referred to the section of Conditional Statement in 202205061240#, which is “There exists at least one computer program that it is in Java programming language, and it has less than 5 lines”.

  • Mathematical Statement
  • Existential Universal Statement

    If a 202204281244 consists of both the property of 202204281254# and #202204281245, which is itself a kind of #202205061208, then it is an Existential Universal Statement

#logic