1. Vincent

    Yes it does. In fact, that’s the point. The usual example used is proving that the square root of 2 is not a rational number. So we assume that the square root of 2 *is* a rational number, and at the end of a series of arguments, we get a contradiction. Hence, our original assumption must be wrong. So square root of 2 is *not* a rational number.

    Personally, I feel like proof by contradiction is used when other methods of proving proves (pun not intended) to be lengthy or difficult. It’s like, “I don’t know how to prove the sun rises in the east.” So, “Let’s assume the sun doesn’t rise in the east!”.

Comments are closed.