
The Ubiquity of Elliptic Curves
... Similarly, in the field F41, we have 11 x 15 = 1 and 23 x 25 = 1 and 19 x 13 = 1 and … This illustrates why we use a prime p, instead of a number like 12. In a finite field Fp, every nonzero number has a reciprocal. So Fp is a lot like the rational numbers Q and the real numbers R: In Fp, not only c ...
... Similarly, in the field F41, we have 11 x 15 = 1 and 23 x 25 = 1 and 19 x 13 = 1 and … This illustrates why we use a prime p, instead of a number like 12. In a finite field Fp, every nonzero number has a reciprocal. So Fp is a lot like the rational numbers Q and the real numbers R: In Fp, not only c ...
Sieving and the Erdos-Kac theorem
... z where z is suitably small so that the error term arising from the |rd |’s is negligible. If the numbers a in A are not too large, then there cannot be too many primes larger than z that divide a, and so Proposition 3 furnishes information about ω(a). Note that we used precisely such an argument in ...
... z where z is suitably small so that the error term arising from the |rd |’s is negligible. If the numbers a in A are not too large, then there cannot be too many primes larger than z that divide a, and so Proposition 3 furnishes information about ω(a). Note that we used precisely such an argument in ...
MULTIPLICATIVE SEMIGROUPS RELATED TO THE 3x + 1
... We want kp = qn − 1 for some n such that 2qn − 1 is p-smooth, since 2qn−1 qn−1 ∈ Sq [B]. Then kp ≡ −1 (mod q) so the possible values of k are in an arithmetic progression of difference q. The p-smooth number will have to be 2kp + 1, taking values in an arithmetic progression of difference 2qp. By Le ...
... We want kp = qn − 1 for some n such that 2qn − 1 is p-smooth, since 2qn−1 qn−1 ∈ Sq [B]. Then kp ≡ −1 (mod q) so the possible values of k are in an arithmetic progression of difference q. The p-smooth number will have to be 2kp + 1, taking values in an arithmetic progression of difference 2qp. By Le ...
Views of Pi: definition and computation
... towards 0. Moreover, the term |an xn | gives a bound to the value of Σ∞ i=n+1 ai x . So we define a function for approximating values of the cosine and sine based on these results. Basically, sin approx x n computes the first terms of the series for the sine function up to the term of exponent 2n + ...
... towards 0. Moreover, the term |an xn | gives a bound to the value of Σ∞ i=n+1 ai x . So we define a function for approximating values of the cosine and sine based on these results. Basically, sin approx x n computes the first terms of the series for the sine function up to the term of exponent 2n + ...
3. Mathematical Induction 3.1. First Principle of
... You do not try to prove the induction hypothesis. Now you prove that P (n+1) follows from P (n). In other words, you will use the truth of P (n) to show that P (n + 1) must also be true. Indeed, it may be possible to prove the implication P (n) → P (n + 1) even though the predicate P (n) is actually ...
... You do not try to prove the induction hypothesis. Now you prove that P (n+1) follows from P (n). In other words, you will use the truth of P (n) to show that P (n + 1) must also be true. Indeed, it may be possible to prove the implication P (n) → P (n + 1) even though the predicate P (n) is actually ...
Additive decompositions of sets with restricted prime factors
... only looking at special examples, and to identify a large family of multiplicatively defined sets (including sets of smooth numbers, the set of primes, and sets of integers composed from dense subsequences of the primes) for which one has the same consequences: if the sets can be asymptotically addi ...
... only looking at special examples, and to identify a large family of multiplicatively defined sets (including sets of smooth numbers, the set of primes, and sets of integers composed from dense subsequences of the primes) for which one has the same consequences: if the sets can be asymptotically addi ...
Consequence Operators for Defeasible - SeDiCI
... Proposition 5.3 (Monotonicity). The operator Cwar (¡ ) does not satisfy monotonicity. Proof. A counterexample su±ces. Consider the example given in proposition 4.3. In that case, ¡ j»T pU hence p is warranted. However, in ¡ [f[;; fn1g]:qg there is no argument with conclusion p (and consequently p is ...
... Proposition 5.3 (Monotonicity). The operator Cwar (¡ ) does not satisfy monotonicity. Proof. A counterexample su±ces. Consider the example given in proposition 4.3. In that case, ¡ j»T pU hence p is warranted. However, in ¡ [f[;; fn1g]:qg there is no argument with conclusion p (and consequently p is ...
pdf version
... only use the factors kj a where kj and n have no common divisor (other than 1). Obviously k1 = 1. There are φ(n) such factors. Then equation (1) is replaced by (a)(k2 a)(k3 a) · · · (kφ(n) a) ≡ (1)(k1 ) · · · (kφ(n) ) (mod n), that is [aφ(n) − 1](1)(k2 ) · · · (kφ(n) ) ≡ 0 (mod n). Since none of k1 ...
... only use the factors kj a where kj and n have no common divisor (other than 1). Obviously k1 = 1. There are φ(n) such factors. Then equation (1) is replaced by (a)(k2 a)(k3 a) · · · (kφ(n) a) ≡ (1)(k1 ) · · · (kφ(n) ) (mod n), that is [aφ(n) − 1](1)(k2 ) · · · (kφ(n) ) ≡ 0 (mod n). Since none of k1 ...
Number Theory Begins - Princeton University Press
... for our ten digits, but as you can imagine the Babylonians didn’t have sixty different symbols to use. Instead, for the number 57 they would just make seven vertical marks next to five marks shaped like < that each represented 10. You might barely be able to make out these two kinds of marks in Figu ...
... for our ten digits, but as you can imagine the Babylonians didn’t have sixty different symbols to use. Instead, for the number 57 they would just make seven vertical marks next to five marks shaped like < that each represented 10. You might barely be able to make out these two kinds of marks in Figu ...
An Introduction to Contemporary Mathematics
... [HM] is an excellent book. It is one of a small number of texts intended to give you, the reader, a feeling for the theory and applications of contemporary mathematics at an early stage in your mathematical studies. However, [HM] is directed at a different group of students — undergraduate students ...
... [HM] is an excellent book. It is one of a small number of texts intended to give you, the reader, a feeling for the theory and applications of contemporary mathematics at an early stage in your mathematical studies. However, [HM] is directed at a different group of students — undergraduate students ...
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.