Mathematical-Reasoning · Unit 5 · Video 1 · Interactive Practice
What Makes a Quantified Statement True: For Every, There Exists, and Their Negations
IKey Formulas
Form
Name
True exactly when
(∀x∈U)(P(x))
Universal quantifier: “for every”, “for each”
{x∈U∣P(x)}=U: every element of U makes P(x) true
(∃x∈U)(P(x))
Existential quantifier: “there exists”, “there is at least one”
{x∈U∣P(x)}=∅: at least one element of U makes P(x) true
(∀x∈Z)(x is a multiple of 2) negates to (∃x∈Z)(x is not a multiple of 2)
Negating “for every”
the statement is false, its negation true, since 3 is not a multiple of 2
(∃x∈Z)(x3>0) negates to (∀x∈Z)(x3≤0)
Negating “there exists”
the statement is true (13=1>0), its negation false
Key Insight: only a quantifier turns an open sentence into a statement. sin(2x)=2sinxcosx has truth set R and is still an open sentence; (∀x∈R)(sin(2x)=2sinxcosx) is a true statement. “There exists” means at least one, never exactly one.
IIOne Truth Set, Two Quantifiers
A ∀ statement is true when the truth set is all of U; an ∃ statement, when the truth set is nonempty.
IIINegating a Quantified Statement
Negation swaps ∀ and ∃, negates the predicate, and gives the opposite truth value.
💡 The next video states this pattern as a theorem and proves it with truth sets.
IVQuiz Questions
Problem 1 · An Existential Statement over the Integers
Given: the statement (∃x∈Z)(2x+1=6). Which verdict and reason are correct?
✅ Correct! The only solution of 2x+1=6 is 25, which is not an integer, so the truth set over Z is empty and the existential statement is false.
❌ Not quite.25 does solve the equation, but the universal set is Z and 25∈/Z.
❌ Not quite. The phrase (∃x∈Z) quantifies x, so this is a statement and has a truth value.
❌ Right verdict, wrong reason. One value that fails cannot make an existential statement false; you must show that no integer works.
❌ Not quite. Solve the equation, then check whether the solution lies in the universal set Z.
Show solution
An existential statement is true exactly when its truth set is not empty. Solve the predicate:
2x+1=6⟹2x=5⟹x=25.
That is the only solution, and 25∈/Z. So
{x∈Z∣2x+1=6}=∅,
and the statement is false. Checking a single value such as x=0 is not enough: that only shows 0 is outside the truth set.
Problem 2 · Statement or Open Sentence?
Given: the universal set is R for every variable. Which of the following is a statement, and is it true?
Which one is a statement?
What is its truth value?
✅ Correct! Only the quantified sentence is a statement, and it is true because at least one real number (in fact two) satisfies x2=9.
❌ Not quite. Every real number makes this identity true, so its truth set is R, but nothing quantifies x: it is still an open sentence.
❌ Not quite. Nothing quantifies x in that sentence, so it is an open sentence with a truth set, not a statement.
❌ Not quite. “There exists” means at least one, that is, one or more; two solutions are more than enough.
❌ Not quite. One failing value cannot make an existential statement false; the truth set only has to contain at least one element.
❌ Not quite. Find the truth set of x2=9 over R and ask whether it is empty.
Show solution
The test is whether the variable is quantified. In (a), (b) and (d) nothing quantifies x, so each is an open sentence with a truth set:
(a) is an identity: its truth set is R, yet it is an open sentence;
(b) has truth set {314};
(d) has truth set {x∈R∣x≥0}.
Only (c) is a statement. Its predicate gives x2=9⟺x=3 or x=−3, so
{x∈R∣x2=9}={−3,3}=∅,
and the existential statement is true. It claims at least one solution, so having two does not hurt.
Problem 3 · A Quantified Conditional
Given: the open sentence “If x2<9, then x>0” with universal set R. Find its truth set, then decide the statement (∀x∈R)(if x2<9, then x>0).
What is the truth set of the open sentence?
Is the quantified statement true?
✅ Correct! The truth set leaves out −3<x≤0, so it is not all of R, and x=−1 is one of the values it leaves out.
❌ Not quite. That is where the conclusion is true; the conditional is also true wherever the hypothesis x2<9 is false.
❌ Not quite. That is where the conditional fails (hypothesis true, conclusion false), the opposite of the truth set.
❌ Not quite. That is where the hypothesis is false; the conditional is also true wherever the conclusion x>0 is true.
❌ Not quite. A conditional is true when its hypothesis is false or its conclusion is true; combine those two sets.
❌ Not quite. One value that works cannot make a universal statement true; every real number would have to be in the truth set.
❌ Right verdict, wrong reason. At x=4 the hypothesis is false, so the conditional is true there; 4 is in the truth set.
❌ Not quite. A nonempty truth set makes an existential statement true; a universal statement needs the truth set to be all of R.
❌ Not quite. Compare the truth set from the first part with R.
Show solution
A conditional is true when its hypothesis is false or its conclusion is true.
The hypothesis x2<9 is false when x2≥9, that is, when x≤−3 or x≥3.
The conclusion x>0 is true when x>0.
Together these give x≤−3 or x>0 (the ray x≥3 is already inside x>0):
{x∈R∣x≤−3}∪{x∈R∣x>0}.
The conditional fails exactly when −3<x≤0. For instance, x=−1 gives (−1)2=1<9 (hypothesis true) but −1>0 is false (conclusion false). The truth set is not all of R, so the universal statement is false.
Problem 4 · Negate, Then Decide
Given: the statement (∀x∈Z)(x2>x). Find its negation, then decide which of the two is true.
What is the negation?
Which of the pair is true?
✅ Correct! The quantifier ∀ became ∃, the predicate x2>x became x2≤x, and the integer 1 makes the negation true, so the original is false.
❌ Not quite. The quantifier must change too: the negation of a claim about every integer says that at least one integer breaks it.
❌ Not quite. The quantifier changed, but the predicate must be negated as well: not x2>x is x2≤x.
❌ Not quite. “Not greater than” means “less than or equal to”, so x2=x must be included.
❌ Not quite. Change ∀ to ∃ and negate the predicate.
❌ Not quite. One integer that works cannot make a universal statement true; test small integers such as 0 and 1.
❌ Not quite. A statement and its negation always have opposite truth values.
❌ Not quite. A statement and its negation always have opposite truth values, so exactly one of them is true.
❌ Not quite. Look for an integer whose square is not larger than itself.
Show solution
The statement claims that every integer satisfies x2>x. Its negation says that this claim fails, so at least one integer does not satisfy x2>x. A number that is not greater than another is less than or equal to it, so the negation is
(∃x∈Z)(x2≤x).
Now test small integers: 12=1≤1 (and also 02=0≤0). So the truth set of x2≤x over Z is not empty, and the negation is true. The original statement is therefore false: its truth set leaves out 0 and 1, so it is not all of Z.