<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OALibJ</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Access Library Journal</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2333-9705</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/oalib.1101803</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OALibJ-68573</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Biomedical&amp;Life Sciences</subject><subject> Business&amp;Economics</subject><subject> Chemistry&amp;Materials Science</subject><subject> Computer Science&amp;Communications</subject><subject> Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject><subject> Engineering</subject><subject> Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject><subject> Physics&amp;Mathematics</subject><subject> Social Sciences&amp;Humanities</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Do the Two Operations Addition and Multiplication Commute with Each Other?
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Koji</surname><given-names>Nagata</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Tadao</surname><given-names>Nakamura</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Department of Information and Computer Science, Keio University, Yokohama, Japan</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Physics, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon, Korea</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>ko_mi_na@yahoo.co.jp(KN)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>28</day><month>08</month><year>2015</year></pub-date><volume>02</volume><issue>08</issue><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>4</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>30</day>	<month>July</month>	<year>2015</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>accepted</day>	<month>21</month>	<year>August</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>24</day>	<month>August</month>	<year>2015</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
   
   We study about the metamathematics of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice. We use the validity of Addition and Multiplication. We provide an example that the two operations Addition and Multiplication do not commute with each other. All analyses are performed in a finite set of natural numbers. 
  
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Set Theory</kwd><kwd> Formalism</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice, commonly abbreviated ZFC, is the standard form of axiomatic set theory and as such is the most common foundation of mathematics. It has a single primitive ontological notion, that of a hereditary well-founded set, and a single ontological assumption, namely that all individuals in the universe of discourse are such sets. ZFC is a one-sorted theory in first-order logic. The signature has equality and a single primitive binary relation, set membership, which is usually denoted &#206;. The formula <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> means that the set a is a member of the set b (which is also read, “a is an element of b” or “a is in b”). Most of the ZFC axioms state that particular sets exist. For example, the axiom of pairing says that given any two sets a and b there is a new set <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> containing exactly a and b. Other axioms describe properties of set membership. A goal of the ZFC axioms is that each axiom should be true if interpreted as a statement about the collection of all sets in the von Neumann universe (also known as the cumulative hierarchy). The me- tamathematics of ZFC has been extensively studied. Landmark results in this area that is established the in- dependence of the continuum hypothesis from ZFC, and of the axiom of choice from the remaining ZFC axioms [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.68573-ref1">1</xref>] . Mach literature concerning above topic can be seen in Refs. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.68573-ref2">2</xref>] - [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.68573-ref18">18</xref>] .</p><p>We use the validity of Addition and Multiplication. Here we aim to provide an example that the two opera- tions Addition and Multiplication do not commute with each other. All analyses are performed in a finite set of natural numbers.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. The Two Operations Addition and Multiplication Do Not Commute with Each Other</title><p>Assume all axioms of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice is true.</p><p>Let us start with a singleton set</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula428"><label>(1)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x7.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>We treat here Addition. We have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula429"><label>(2)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x8.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Thus we obtain 2. By using the obtained 2, we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula430"><label>(3)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x9.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Thus we obtain 3. By repeating this method for an even number time, we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula431"><label>(4)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x10.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>By repeating this method, we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula432"><label>(5)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x11.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Thus we have the following finite set of natural numbers</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula433"><label>(6)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x12.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>By using the set (6), we discuss that the two operations Addition and Multiplication do not commute with each other.</p><p>We consider a value V which is the sum of the results of trials. Result of trials is 1 or 2. We assume the number of 2 is equal to the number of 1. The number of trials is 2 m. We have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula434"><label>(7)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x13.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>We derive the possible value of the product <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x14.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> of the value V. It is</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula435"><label>(8)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x15.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>We assign the truth value “1” for the following proposition</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula436"><label>(9)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x16.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>We have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula437"><label>(10)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x17.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>The value <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x18.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> which is the sum of the results of trials is given by</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula438"><label>(11)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x19.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>We assume that the possible value of the actually happened results <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x20.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is 1 or 2. We have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula439"><label>(12)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x21.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>The same value is given by</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula440"><label>(13)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x22.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>We only change the labels as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x23.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x23.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x24.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. The possible value of the actually happened results <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x23.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x24.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x25.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is 1 or 2. We have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula441"><label>(14)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x26.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>and</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula442"><label>(15)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x27.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Here<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x28.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. By using these facts we derive a necessary condition for the value given in (11). We derive the possible value of the product <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x28.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x29.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> of the value V given in (11). We have the following under the assumption that the two operations Addition and Multiplication commute with each other.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula443"><graphic  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x30.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula444"><label>(16)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x31.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula445"><label>(17)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x32.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula446"><label>(18)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x33.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula447"><label>(19)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x34.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula448"><label>(20)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x35.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula449"><label>(21)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x36.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>The step (16) to (17) is OK. The step (17) to (18) is valid under the assumption that the two operations Addition and Multiplication commute with each other. The step (18) to (19) is true since we have only changed the label as<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x37.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>The above inequality (19) is saturated since</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula450"><label>(22)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x38.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>and</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula451"><label>(23)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x39.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>We derive a proposition concerning the value given in (11) under the assumption that the possible value of the actually happened results is 1 or 2, that is<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x40.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. We derive the following proposition</p><disp-formula id="scirp.68573-formula452"><label>(24)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/68573x41.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>We do not assign the truth value “1” for the two propositions (10) and (24) simultaneously. We are in a contradiction. Thus we have to give up the assumption that the two operations Addition and Multiplication commute with each other.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Conclusion</title><p>In conclusions, we have used the validity of Addition and Multiplication. We have provided an example that the two operations Addition and Multiplication do not commute with each other. All analyses have been performed in a finite set of natural numbers.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Koji Nagata,Tadao Nakamura, (2015) Do the Two Operations Addition and Multiplication Commute with Each Other?. Open Access Library Journal,02,1-4. doi: 10.4236/oalib.1101803</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.68573-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory—Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Abian, A. (1965) The Theory of Sets and Transfinite Arithmetic. W B Saunders.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Abian, A. and LaMacchia, S. (1978) On the Consistency and Independence of Some Set-Theoretical Axioms. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 19, 155-158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1305/ndjfl/1093888220</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Devlin, K. (1984) The Joy of Sets. Springer.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fraenkel, A., Bar-Hillel, Y. and Levy, A. (1958) Foundations of Set Theory. Fraenkel’s Final Word on ZF and ZFC, North Holland.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hatcher, W. (1968) The Logical Foundations of Mathematics. Pergamon.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Jech, T. (2003) Set Theory: The Third Millennium Edition, Revised and Expanded. Springer.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kunen, K. (1980) Set Theory: An Introduction to Independence Proofs. Elsevier.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Montague, R. (1961) “Semantic Closure and Non-Finite Axiomatizability” in Infinistic Methods. Pergamon, London, 45-69.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Suppes, P. (1960) Axiomatic Set Theory. Dover Reprint. Perhaps the Best Exposition of ZFC before the Independence of AC and the Continuum Hypothesis, and the Emergence of Large Cardinals. Includes Many Theorems.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Takeuti, G. and Zaring, W.M. (1971) Introduction to Axiomatic Set Theory. Springer Verlag.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Tarski</surname><given-names> A. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1939</year>)<article-title>On Well-Ordered Subsets of Any Set</article-title><source> Fundamenta Mathematicae</source><volume> 32</volume>,<fpage> 176</fpage>-<lpage>183</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tiles, M. (1989) The Philosophy of Set Theory. Dover Reprint. Weak on Metatheory; the Author Is Not a Mathematician.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tourlakis, G. (2003) Lectures in Logic and Set Theory. Vol. 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">van Heijenoort, J. (1967) From Frege to Godel: A Source Book in Mathematical Logic, 1879-1931. Harvard Univ. Press. Includes Annotated English Translations of the Classic Articles by Zermelo, Fraenkel, and Skolem Bearing on ZFC.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zermelo, E. (1908) Untersuchungen uber die Grundlagen der Mengenlehre I. Mathematische Annalen, 65, 261-281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01449999</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">van Heijenoort, J. (1967) Investigations in the Foundations of Set Theory. From Frege to Godel: A Source Book in Mathematical Logic, 1879-1931. Source Books in the History of the Sciences, Harvard University Press, 199-215.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.68573-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Zermelo</surname><given-names> E. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1930</year>)<article-title>Uber Grenzzablen und Mengenbereiche</article-title><source> Fundamenta Mathematicae</source><volume> 16</volume>,<fpage> 29</fpage>-<lpage>47</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>