
Building explicit induction schemas for cyclic induction reasoning
... of induction hypotheses representing ‘not yet proved’ formulas. The induction hypotheses can be defined before their use, by explicit induction schemas that can be directly embedded in inference systems using explicit induction rules. On the other hand, the induction hypotheses can also be defined b ...
... of induction hypotheses representing ‘not yet proved’ formulas. The induction hypotheses can be defined before their use, by explicit induction schemas that can be directly embedded in inference systems using explicit induction rules. On the other hand, the induction hypotheses can also be defined b ...
Formal methods: lecture notes no
... model we can express -calculus then we are actually saying quite a lot. And here is why: every computer program is expressible in -calculus. We will try to show that operations which are most common to all computer languages can be expressed in the language we just have built. ...
... model we can express -calculus then we are actually saying quite a lot. And here is why: every computer program is expressible in -calculus. We will try to show that operations which are most common to all computer languages can be expressed in the language we just have built. ...
29 APPROXIMATION EXPONENTS FOR FUNCTION
... of a polynomial, we can use the same definition as above for the exponent in this situation. Mahler proved analogues of Dirichlet and Liouville bounds by essentially the same proofs. An analogue of Khintchine’s theorem giving the behaviour of “almost all” functions can also be proved similarly. D. Fe ...
... of a polynomial, we can use the same definition as above for the exponent in this situation. Mahler proved analogues of Dirichlet and Liouville bounds by essentially the same proofs. An analogue of Khintchine’s theorem giving the behaviour of “almost all” functions can also be proved similarly. D. Fe ...
RISES, LEVELS, DROPS AND - California State University, Los
... sum is n. A palindromic composition (or palindrome) is one for which the sequence reads the same forwards and backwards. We derive results for the number of “+” signs, summands, levels (a summand followed by itself), rises (a summand followed by a larger one), and drops (a summand followed by a smal ...
... sum is n. A palindromic composition (or palindrome) is one for which the sequence reads the same forwards and backwards. We derive results for the number of “+” signs, summands, levels (a summand followed by itself), rises (a summand followed by a larger one), and drops (a summand followed by a smal ...
english, pdf
... (ii) 2kFn . Then n = 3m, where m is odd. Since 2kFn and d(Fn ) can be a multiple of 2 but not of 4, it follows that Fn = 2. Thus, n ∈ {3, 6}, of which only the solution n = 3 is convenient. (iii) There is no n such that 4kFn . (iv) 8kFn . Then d(8) = 4 divides d(Fn ), a number which may be divisibl ...
... (ii) 2kFn . Then n = 3m, where m is odd. Since 2kFn and d(Fn ) can be a multiple of 2 but not of 4, it follows that Fn = 2. Thus, n ∈ {3, 6}, of which only the solution n = 3 is convenient. (iii) There is no n such that 4kFn . (iv) 8kFn . Then d(8) = 4 divides d(Fn ), a number which may be divisibl ...
Reducing the Erdos-Moser equation 1^ n+ 2^ n+...+ k^ n=(k+ 1)^ n
... there is no solution. (r = 6, 7, 8). For the numbers K in Table 1 with r = 6, 7, 8 prime factors, conditions (i) and (ii) k require + 1 ≡ −p (mod p2 ), for p = 2, 3, 2, respectively. But the requirement is violated in each p case, and so no solution exists. (ii). Part (i) implies that the only possi ...
... there is no solution. (r = 6, 7, 8). For the numbers K in Table 1 with r = 6, 7, 8 prime factors, conditions (i) and (ii) k require + 1 ≡ −p (mod p2 ), for p = 2, 3, 2, respectively. But the requirement is violated in each p case, and so no solution exists. (ii). Part (i) implies that the only possi ...
On the existence of a connected component
... It is easier to build a connected component when the graph has only finitely many components. Theorem RCA0 proves that if a countable graph G has a finite set of vertices V0 such that every vertex in G is path connected to some vertex in V0 , then G can be decomposed into components. In particular, ...
... It is easier to build a connected component when the graph has only finitely many components. Theorem RCA0 proves that if a countable graph G has a finite set of vertices V0 such that every vertex in G is path connected to some vertex in V0 , then G can be decomposed into components. In particular, ...
CHAP02 Numbers
... But how can we prove that something will always work? We can’t check every instance! The answer is that we can often use an argument that works in every case. But sometimes we can only do it by climbing up a ladder, going from one instance to another. This is the Principle of Induction. We prove tha ...
... But how can we prove that something will always work? We can’t check every instance! The answer is that we can often use an argument that works in every case. But sometimes we can only do it by climbing up a ladder, going from one instance to another. This is the Principle of Induction. We prove tha ...
(A B) (A B) (A B) (A B)
... Proof: We must show that when AB AB is true then A=B is true. (Proof by contradiction) Assume that AB AB is true but AB. If AB then this means that either xA but xB, or xB but xA. If xA but xB, then x AB but x AB so AB is not a subset of AB and we have a contradiction t ...
... Proof: We must show that when AB AB is true then A=B is true. (Proof by contradiction) Assume that AB AB is true but AB. If AB then this means that either xA but xB, or xB but xA. If xA but xB, then x AB but x AB so AB is not a subset of AB and we have a contradiction t ...
Number Theory II: Congruences
... techniques you’ve learned earlier in this course, and you should be able to carry out such proofs. Some examples will be given in class or on worksheets; others will be assigned as homework. • Notes. • Congruences to different moduli can NOT be added, multiplied, etc. In the above properties, the mo ...
... techniques you’ve learned earlier in this course, and you should be able to carry out such proofs. Some examples will be given in class or on worksheets; others will be assigned as homework. • Notes. • Congruences to different moduli can NOT be added, multiplied, etc. In the above properties, the mo ...
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.