answersLogoWhite

0

Given a proposition X, a regular proof known facts and logical arguments to show that X must be true. For an indirect proof, you assume that the negation of X is true. You then use known facts and logical arguments to show that this leads to a contradiction. The conclusion then is that the assumption about ~X being true is false and that is equivalent to showing that X is true.

User Avatar

Wiki User

7y ago

Still curious? Ask our experts.

Chat with our AI personalities

ProfessorProfessor
I will give you the most educated answer.
Chat with Professor
SteveSteve
Knowledge is a journey, you know? We'll get there.
Chat with Steve
RafaRafa
There's no fun in playing it safe. Why not try something a little unhinged?
Chat with Rafa

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: How does an indirect proof differ from a regular proof?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp