• Study Resource
  • Explore
    • Arts & Humanities
    • Business
    • Engineering & Technology
    • Foreign Language
    • History
    • Math
    • Science
    • Social Science

    Top subcategories

    • Advanced Math
    • Algebra
    • Basic Math
    • Calculus
    • Geometry
    • Linear Algebra
    • Pre-Algebra
    • Pre-Calculus
    • Statistics And Probability
    • Trigonometry
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Astronomy
    • Astrophysics
    • Biology
    • Chemistry
    • Earth Science
    • Environmental Science
    • Health Science
    • Physics
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Anthropology
    • Law
    • Political Science
    • Psychology
    • Sociology
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Accounting
    • Economics
    • Finance
    • Management
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Aerospace Engineering
    • Bioengineering
    • Chemical Engineering
    • Civil Engineering
    • Computer Science
    • Electrical Engineering
    • Industrial Engineering
    • Mechanical Engineering
    • Web Design
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Architecture
    • Communications
    • English
    • Gender Studies
    • Music
    • Performing Arts
    • Philosophy
    • Religious Studies
    • Writing
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Ancient History
    • European History
    • US History
    • World History
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Croatian
    • Czech
    • Finnish
    • Greek
    • Hindi
    • Japanese
    • Korean
    • Persian
    • Swedish
    • Turkish
    • other →
 
Profile Documents Logout
Upload
irrationality and transcendence 4. continued fractions.
irrationality and transcendence 4. continued fractions.

... Now as in the quadratic case, the first term here will vanish and the last two will be bounded. However the second term will be, roughly, a constant times qk−1 , which is unbounded, and this will wreck the entire argument. • In view of the theorem just proved and earlier results, we can sum up the c ...
Proof by Induction
Proof by Induction

P 5. #1.1 Proof. n N - Department of Mathematics
P 5. #1.1 Proof. n N - Department of Mathematics

3.5 More on Zeros of Polynomial Functions
3.5 More on Zeros of Polynomial Functions

Number Theory: Factors and Primes
Number Theory: Factors and Primes

... Goals of this lecture • Understand basic concepts of number theory including divisibility, primes, and factors ...
Reading 2 - UConn Logic Group
Reading 2 - UConn Logic Group

PDF
PDF

Full text
Full text

Chapter 2 Propositional Logic
Chapter 2 Propositional Logic

... Proof. The proof consists of computing the truth table. We need to show that the truth table for ¬(p ∧ q) and ¬p ∨ ¬q are the same, which will say that both compound propositions are equivalent. Let us compute in details the first row of the truth table for ¬(p ∧ q) and ¬p ∨ ¬q: if both p and q are ...
Pythagorean Triples. - Doug Jones`s Mathematics Homepage
Pythagorean Triples. - Doug Jones`s Mathematics Homepage

1 Introduction - Clemson University
1 Introduction - Clemson University

Here - Dartmouth Math Home
Here - Dartmouth Math Home

neighborhood semantics for basic and intuitionistic logic
neighborhood semantics for basic and intuitionistic logic

to the PDF file
to the PDF file

The Power of a Prime That Divides a Generalized Binomial Coefficient
The Power of a Prime That Divides a Generalized Binomial Coefficient

Full text
Full text

Pythagorean triangles with legs less than n
Pythagorean triangles with legs less than n

... and area less than n are studied in [6 –8,13]. Asymptotics for the number of general Pythagorean triangles with hypotenuse less than n are shown in [5,10 –12]. Finally, in [2], we can 6nd estimates for the number of Pythagorean triangles with a common hypotenuse, leg-sum, etc., less than n. However, ...
Algebraic degrees of stretch factors in mapping class groups 1
Algebraic degrees of stretch factors in mapping class groups 1

Proofs by induction - Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute
Proofs by induction - Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute

SFU MACM-101-D3 2004
SFU MACM-101-D3 2004

11 Division Mod n - Cargal Math Books
11 Division Mod n - Cargal Math Books

Full text
Full text

Complex Zeros
Complex Zeros

Why Do All Composite Fermat Numbers Become
Why Do All Composite Fermat Numbers Become

... It has been proved that any prime number p satisfies Fermat’s little theorem, which includes Fermat primes. But there are some composite numbers also satisfy Fermat’s little theorem, in which the smallest such composite number is 341=11×31, so that such composite numbers are called pseudoprimes to b ...
Chapter 0. Introduction to the Mathematical Method
Chapter 0. Introduction to the Mathematical Method

... Let there be the following propositions: A: To be multiple of 360 B1: To be multiple of 3 B2: To be multiple of 120 B: B1 ∩ B2 We need to prove that B ⇒ A (B is sufficient for A). Proof B ⇒ A We can easily prove that B ; A with a counterexample. Let us consider x = 240. It is a multiple of 3 (B1). I ...
< 1 ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... 170 >

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.
  • studyres.com © 2025
  • DMCA
  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Report