
logic for the mathematical
... not true; but the conclusion does not follow from them anyway. Actually, in that argument, the word “should” is probably better left out. Mostly, we want to deal with statements which simply state some kind of claimed fact, statements which are clearly either true or false, though which of the two m ...
... not true; but the conclusion does not follow from them anyway. Actually, in that argument, the word “should” is probably better left out. Mostly, we want to deal with statements which simply state some kind of claimed fact, statements which are clearly either true or false, though which of the two m ...
Max, Min, Sup, Inf
... Hint: In the proof of the upper bound (which is requested in Exercise 2), you will discover that you need to prove n2 − 7n + 12 ≥ 0. Factor this polynomial and determine when it can be negative. (r) { 3n+1 | n ∈ N} n+1 (2) Prove your answers in Exercise 1. (3) In Example 5, use a graphing calculator ...
... Hint: In the proof of the upper bound (which is requested in Exercise 2), you will discover that you need to prove n2 − 7n + 12 ≥ 0. Factor this polynomial and determine when it can be negative. (r) { 3n+1 | n ∈ N} n+1 (2) Prove your answers in Exercise 1. (3) In Example 5, use a graphing calculator ...
Fibonacci Identities as Binomial Sums
... Finding the exact value of Fn from (2) requires multiple steps of busy and messy algebraic calculations which is not desirable. So, our goal in this note is to present Fn as a binomial sum for quick numerical calculations. Likewise, we use this binomial sum to write some well-known and fundamental i ...
... Finding the exact value of Fn from (2) requires multiple steps of busy and messy algebraic calculations which is not desirable. So, our goal in this note is to present Fn as a binomial sum for quick numerical calculations. Likewise, we use this binomial sum to write some well-known and fundamental i ...
Exploring great mysteries about prime numbers
... Proof: Suppose the conclusion of the theorem is false (i.e., that there are only finitely many prime numbers). Show how this leads to a logical impossibility, and hence the theorem must be true. ...
... Proof: Suppose the conclusion of the theorem is false (i.e., that there are only finitely many prime numbers). Show how this leads to a logical impossibility, and hence the theorem must be true. ...
LANDAU`S PROBLEMS ON PRIMES 1. Introduction In his invited
... is always solvable in primes x, y if the coefficients a, b, c are given pairwise relatively prime integers.” There are close ties between Landau’s problems. These connections depend strongly upon which formulation of the Conjectures (2.14)–(2.16) we consider. The first two are really generalizations ...
... is always solvable in primes x, y if the coefficients a, b, c are given pairwise relatively prime integers.” There are close ties between Landau’s problems. These connections depend strongly upon which formulation of the Conjectures (2.14)–(2.16) we consider. The first two are really generalizations ...
numbers and uniform ergodic theorems
... theorem. More details in this direction will be presented in Section 1.3 below. 4. In Section 1.1 we review the essential aspects from ergodic theory (and physics) which additionally clarify the meaning and importance of (1.1). We hope that this material will help the reader unfamiliar with ergodic ...
... theorem. More details in this direction will be presented in Section 1.3 below. 4. In Section 1.1 we review the essential aspects from ergodic theory (and physics) which additionally clarify the meaning and importance of (1.1). We hope that this material will help the reader unfamiliar with ergodic ...
THE CHINESE REMAINDER THEOREM INTRODUCED IN A
... ϕ (n) is the Euler phi function or totient function dened to be the number of positive integers not exceeding ...
... ϕ (n) is the Euler phi function or totient function dened to be the number of positive integers not exceeding ...
Modal Logic for Artificial Intelligence
... Some rules are very simple: if you can prove ϕ and you can prove ψ, then you can also prove their conjunction ϕ ∧ ψ. Other rules are more complicated. For example, the only way to ‘eliminate’ the disjunction ϕ ∨ ψ is by proving, first that ϕ ∨ ψ, and second, that some conclusion χ can be proven both ...
... Some rules are very simple: if you can prove ϕ and you can prove ψ, then you can also prove their conjunction ϕ ∧ ψ. Other rules are more complicated. For example, the only way to ‘eliminate’ the disjunction ϕ ∨ ψ is by proving, first that ϕ ∨ ψ, and second, that some conclusion χ can be proven both ...
classification of symmetry generating polygon-trans
... the resulting concentric polygons has fascinated mathematicians for over a century [6]. The most popular theorem in this area is Napoleon’s Theorem [19] where a regular triangle is constructed within one transformation step by connecting the centers of equilateral triangles erected on each side of t ...
... the resulting concentric polygons has fascinated mathematicians for over a century [6]. The most popular theorem in this area is Napoleon’s Theorem [19] where a regular triangle is constructed within one transformation step by connecting the centers of equilateral triangles erected on each side of t ...
Powers of Two as Sums of Two Lucas Numbers
... Let (Fn )n≥0 be the Fibonacci sequence given by F0 = 0, F1 = 1 and Fn+2 = Fn+1 + Fn for all n ≥ 0. The Fibonacci numbers are famous for possessing wonderful and amazing properties. They are accompanied by the sequence of Lucas numbers, which is as important as the Fibonacci sequence. The Lucas seque ...
... Let (Fn )n≥0 be the Fibonacci sequence given by F0 = 0, F1 = 1 and Fn+2 = Fn+1 + Fn for all n ≥ 0. The Fibonacci numbers are famous for possessing wonderful and amazing properties. They are accompanied by the sequence of Lucas numbers, which is as important as the Fibonacci sequence. The Lucas seque ...
Theorem
In mathematics, a theorem is a statement that has been proven on the basis of previously established statements, such as other theorems—and generally accepted statements, such as axioms. The proof of a mathematical theorem is a logical argument for the theorem statement given in accord with the rules of a deductive system. The proof of a theorem is often interpreted as justification of the truth of the theorem statement. In light of the requirement that theorems be proved, the concept of a theorem is fundamentally deductive, in contrast to the notion of a scientific theory, which is empirical.Many mathematical theorems are conditional statements. In this case, the proof deduces the conclusion from conditions called hypotheses or premises. In light of the interpretation of proof as justification of truth, the conclusion is often viewed as a necessary consequence of the hypotheses, namely, that the conclusion is true in case the hypotheses are true, without any further assumptions. However, the conditional could be interpreted differently in certain deductive systems, depending on the meanings assigned to the derivation rules and the conditional symbol.Although they can be written in a completely symbolic form, for example, within the propositional calculus, theorems are often expressed in a natural language such as English. The same is true of proofs, which are often expressed as logically organized and clearly worded informal arguments, intended to convince readers of the truth of the statement of the theorem beyond any doubt, and from which a formal symbolic proof can in principle be constructed. Such arguments are typically easier to check than purely symbolic ones—indeed, many mathematicians would express a preference for a proof that not only demonstrates the validity of a theorem, but also explains in some way why it is obviously true. In some cases, a picture alone may be sufficient to prove a theorem. Because theorems lie at the core of mathematics, they are also central to its aesthetics. Theorems are often described as being ""trivial"", or ""difficult"", or ""deep"", or even ""beautiful"". These subjective judgments vary not only from person to person, but also with time: for example, as a proof is simplified or better understood, a theorem that was once difficult may become trivial. On the other hand, a deep theorem may be simply stated, but its proof may involve surprising and subtle connections between disparate areas of mathematics. Fermat's Last Theorem is a particularly well-known example of such a theorem.