I need some proof...
-
Vikram Punathambekar wrote: Your "proof" seems brilliant and absurd at the same time I have found my new sig :) I thought about it again after I posted it, and realised there are some holes. This time i'll do it on paper instead on keyboard. :) But I'll ask him tomorrow morning and post the findings tomorrow night, or later tonite if I get a proper proof. Later then :) Hey leppie! Your "proof" seems brilliant and absurd at the same time - Vikram Punathambekar 28 Apr '03
leppie wrote: I have found my new sig At last! I was thinking I'd never get quoted. Now my wish has come true. I can die in peace...but wait! Before that I want that proof! :-D leppie wrote: This time i'll do it on paper Just what I was about to suggest. Do it on paper, scan it and email it to me. You can reach me at binarybandit@operamail.com (talk about redundancy, it's there in the mail header, I'll bet). Thanks (for the help and quoting me ;) ), Vikram. "There's probably a Nish-like alien answering VB questions on a CP forum as we speak." - adamUK in The Lounge, discussing aliens and parallel universes. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.
-
leppie wrote: I have found my new sig At last! I was thinking I'd never get quoted. Now my wish has come true. I can die in peace...but wait! Before that I want that proof! :-D leppie wrote: This time i'll do it on paper Just what I was about to suggest. Do it on paper, scan it and email it to me. You can reach me at binarybandit@operamail.com (talk about redundancy, it's there in the mail header, I'll bet). Thanks (for the help and quoting me ;) ), Vikram. "There's probably a Nish-like alien answering VB questions on a CP forum as we speak." - adamUK in The Lounge, discussing aliens and parallel universes. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.
Vikram Punathambekar wrote: Do it on paper, scan it and email it to me. No scanner :( But here is what I would say sufficient proof. Show for 2 postive numbers x, y that when n = xy x < n^(1/2) <==> n^(1/2) < y Lets assume the assumption is correct, then x < n^(1/2) < y , and from that follows x < y Now work back to where we started. x < y <==> x < y ...(only a fool would not believe this) x^2 < xy <==> xy < y^2 ...(x > 0, y > 0) x^2 < n <==> n < y^2 ...(n = xy given) x < n^(1/2) <==> n^(1/2) < y ...(n > 0 as n = xy, x > 0, y > 0) Thus it proofs that Given 2 postive numbers x, y that when n = xy x < n^(1/2) <==> n^(1/2) < y PS: This appears to be proof enouhg from my PoV :) Hey leppie! Your "proof" seems brilliant and absurd at the same time. - Vikram Punathambekar 28 Apr '03
-
Your post is all mixed up, undoubtedly due to using < improperly. Please repost so I can understand. Vikram. "There's probably a Nish-like alien answering VB questions on a CP forum as we speak." - adamUK in The Lounge, discussing aliens and parallel universes. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.
I modified it to show properly.
-
Vikram Punathambekar wrote: Do it on paper, scan it and email it to me. No scanner :( But here is what I would say sufficient proof. Show for 2 postive numbers x, y that when n = xy x < n^(1/2) <==> n^(1/2) < y Lets assume the assumption is correct, then x < n^(1/2) < y , and from that follows x < y Now work back to where we started. x < y <==> x < y ...(only a fool would not believe this) x^2 < xy <==> xy < y^2 ...(x > 0, y > 0) x^2 < n <==> n < y^2 ...(n = xy given) x < n^(1/2) <==> n^(1/2) < y ...(n > 0 as n = xy, x > 0, y > 0) Thus it proofs that Given 2 postive numbers x, y that when n = xy x < n^(1/2) <==> n^(1/2) < y PS: This appears to be proof enouhg from my PoV :) Hey leppie! Your "proof" seems brilliant and absurd at the same time. - Vikram Punathambekar 28 Apr '03
Sorry, leppie! This time your proof is only absurd. Sorry. If you will see correctly, you will notice that you are assuming what is to be proved as true and using that, you get the result. This CANNOT be accepted as proof at all. There is even a term for this thing- assuming the statement to be proved to be true and using this to get the result. I forgot what it is. :-O I'll be going to college tomorrow (err...today, it's way past 12:00) and I'll ask my Math staff for a proof. It's doubtful, given that tomorrow's my last exam, but I'll hope for the best. leppie wrote: This appears to be proof enouhg from my PoV What/Who is PoV? BTW, what's your real name? And the link in your bio is phony. :suss: Thanx, Vikram. "There's probably a Nish-like alien answering VB questions on a CP forum as we speak." - adamUK in The Lounge, discussing aliens and parallel universes. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.
-
Sorry, leppie! This time your proof is only absurd. Sorry. If you will see correctly, you will notice that you are assuming what is to be proved as true and using that, you get the result. This CANNOT be accepted as proof at all. There is even a term for this thing- assuming the statement to be proved to be true and using this to get the result. I forgot what it is. :-O I'll be going to college tomorrow (err...today, it's way past 12:00) and I'll ask my Math staff for a proof. It's doubtful, given that tomorrow's my last exam, but I'll hope for the best. leppie wrote: This appears to be proof enouhg from my PoV What/Who is PoV? BTW, what's your real name? And the link in your bio is phony. :suss: Thanx, Vikram. "There's probably a Nish-like alien answering VB questions on a CP forum as we speak." - adamUK in The Lounge, discussing aliens and parallel universes. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.
Vikram Punathambekar wrote: This time your proof is only absurd. Sorry. I was told that ;P :laugh: He said I must try it again, but I have been too tired and working on a CS project (95% done, I hate these polishing bits). Vikram Punathambekar wrote: What/Who is PoV? Point of View, dont you play games? Vikram Punathambekar wrote: BTW, what's your real name? That you can deduct from my email address :) Vikram Punathambekar wrote: And the link in your bio is phony. Nope, just no-one has offered to pay for it. Maybe I'll make that my Terms of Use statement in all my code, if you find the code really helpful, please pay for my website. :) Hey leppie! Your "proof" seems brilliant and absurd at the same time. - Vikram Punathambekar 28 Apr '03
-
Sorry, leppie! This time your proof is only absurd. Sorry. If you will see correctly, you will notice that you are assuming what is to be proved as true and using that, you get the result. This CANNOT be accepted as proof at all. There is even a term for this thing- assuming the statement to be proved to be true and using this to get the result. I forgot what it is. :-O I'll be going to college tomorrow (err...today, it's way past 12:00) and I'll ask my Math staff for a proof. It's doubtful, given that tomorrow's my last exam, but I'll hope for the best. leppie wrote: This appears to be proof enouhg from my PoV What/Who is PoV? BTW, what's your real name? And the link in your bio is phony. :suss: Thanx, Vikram. "There's probably a Nish-like alien answering VB questions on a CP forum as we speak." - adamUK in The Lounge, discussing aliens and parallel universes. "Do not give redundant error messages again and again." - A classmate of mine, while giving a class talk on error detection in compiler design.