You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Offline
What's the black square for Jane?
Offline
I believe it means "proof done".
Just like "Q.E.D"
Last edited by LuisRodg (2009-02-05 12:00:17)
Offline
Yeah, thats what it means.
Offline
For this, I will need to assume the result (which I shall prove in a moment) that all Cauchy sequences are bounded.
Last edited by JaneFairfax (2009-02-05 13:05:49)
Offline
Last edited by JaneFairfax (2009-02-05 13:03:24)
Offline
Offline
I suppose multiplicative inverses come next, that's a fun proof.
"In the real world, this would be a problem. But in mathematics, we can just define a place where this problem doesn't exist. So we'll go ahead and do that now..."
Offline
Offline
In fact, as we shall see, its more than just a field. But Im going to build up the pieces slowly.
http://www.mathisfunforum.com/viewtopic.php?id=10480
Did you remember that thread? Never forget anything I post you never know when it may prove useful one day.
Last edited by JaneFairfax (2009-02-08 14:46:42)
Offline
We now define
to be the set of all non-null Cauchy sequences in satisfying property in the theorem above. Certainly is nonempty since . is thought of as the set of all positive Cauchy sequences of rational numbers.Last edited by JaneFairfax (2009-02-08 01:47:30)
Offline
Offline
Just wanted to note, I believe bar notation for coset representatives is much more standard than hats.
"In the real world, this would be a problem. But in mathematics, we can just define a place where this problem doesn't exist. So we'll go ahead and do that now..."
Offline
The hat notation is used in Sutherlands Introduction to Metric and Topological Spaces. I use it myself because I think its cute.
Offline
This is an important result. It means that we can unambiguously define an order relation in
by
The corollary to Theorem 8 says that this order relation is well defined.
Offline
I AM VERY SORRY, FOLKS. I JUST NOTICED A GAPING HOLE IN MY PROOF OF THEOREM 6 WHICH I MUST PLUG RIGHT AWAY.
I NEED TO CONFIRM THAT THIS SEQUENCE IS CAUCHY (which I didnt do)!!
is essentially a sequence of the form . In view of Theorem 3, one just needs to prove that is Cauchy. Note that this is not true for all Cauchy sequences only for non-null sequences . And to prove that the sequence of reciprocal terms is Cauchy, I shall need to use the result of Theorem 7 which means that I ought to have presented Theorem 7 before Theorem 6.Watch this space.
Last edited by JaneFairfax (2010-12-11 02:25:08)
Offline
Offline
Great manuveur
X'(y-Xβ)=0
Offline
Every metric space can be completed in a way similar to the construction of the real numbers from the rationals by equivalence classes of Cauchy sequences. http://z8.invisionfree.com/DYK/index.php?showtopic=193
Offline
Pages: 1