Logic, Sets & the Language of Proof

implication

An implication is a statement of the form “if P, then Q”, where P is the hypothesis and Q the conclusion. Its promise is narrow: it claims only that whenever P holds, Q holds too. It says nothing whatsoever about what happens when P fails. A useful image is a promise — “if it rains, I'll bring an umbrella” is broken only on a rainy day when you forgot the umbrella; on a dry day the promise stands no matter what you do.

The truth table makes this precise: “P implies Q” is false in exactly one case, namely P true and Q false; in all three other cases it is true. In particular, if P is false the implication is automatically true — this is called being vacuously true. Beginners often resist this, but it is exactly what we need: the theorem “if x > 2 then x > 1” must hold for every real x, including x = 0, where the hypothesis fails.

Almost every theorem in analysis is an implication, and the standard way to prove “P implies Q” is to assume P and deduce Q. Two relatives are worth distinguishing now: the converse “if Q then P” (a logically different statement) and the contrapositive “if not Q then not P” (logically equivalent, and often easier to prove). Confusing an implication with its converse is one of the most common reasoning errors.

“If x = 2 then x^2 = 4” is true. Its converse “if x^2 = 4 then x = 2” is false (take x = -2). So a true implication can have a false converse — the two are genuinely different claims.

An implication and its converse need not have the same truth value.

“P if and only if Q” (the biconditional) bundles the implication with its converse; proving it requires both directions, “P implies Q” and “Q implies P”.

Also called
conditional条件命题條件命題