This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
I've made that mistake so many times! How can we avoid it?
If suppose 3 ≥ − 5 . Then squaring them would give 9 ≥ 2 5 which is not true.So to generalize,the statement can be false when y is a negative real number whose absolute value is greater than any real number x .
To get a big picture, I would draw the function f ( x ) = x 2 . Pick two numbers, and see if their corresponding value matches the inequality. Then you would see that this is only true when both x and y are positive.
Let X be a positive number and Y be a negative number.
Such as X=2 , Y=-3
Substituting for X and Y:
2 > (-3) but 2^2 = 4 and (-3)^2 = 9 giving a case where X > Y but X^2 < Y^2
I proved this is false by considering the contrapositive of the statement, which is logically equivalent to the original conditional statement.
Contrapositive: If x^2<y^2, then x<y.
Counterexample: x=-1/2 and y=-1. x^2 = (-1/2)^2 = 1/4 y^2 = (-1)^2 = 1
But, -1/2 > -1, so x>y, which contradicts the conclusion of the contrapositive.
Let's take x=3&y=-5 then x>y while x^2=9 & y^2=25 here y>x
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Just the case where it wouldn't fit is for negative numbers. Suppose x = − k then k ≤ − y ⟹ k 2 ≤ y 2 ⟹ x 2 ≤ y 2
The actual statement is ∣ x ∣ ≥ ∣ y ∣ ⟹ x 2 ≥ y 2