Tao Analysis: Exercise 2.2.2
The existence of at most one predecessor can be proven by contradiction. Say there existed two natural numbers, b and c, such that $ b++=a $, $ c++=a $, and $ b \neq c $. By substitution, this means that $ b++=c++ $ and $ b \neq c $, which violates Axiom 2.4.
The existence of at least one predecessor can be proven by induction. Let $ P(a) $ be the fact that if $ a $ is positive, then there exists at least one natural $ b $ such that $ b++=a $. When $ a=0 $, $ P(a) $ is vacuously true because 0 is not positive, by definition of positive. Now let's assume that $ P(a) $ applies for some natural number $ a $. By Lemma E.-1, $ a++ $ must be positive. We also know that there exists at least one predecessor to $ a++ $, that being $ a $. Therefore, the implication holds that if $ a++ $ is positive, then it has at least one predecessor. Therefore, if $ P(a) $, $ P(a++) $, which closes the induction.
Because there exists a minimum and maximum of one predecessor to all positive numbers, we now know that there always exists exactly one.
Comments
Post a Comment