In mathematics and logic, a theorem is a non-self-evident statement that has been proven to be true, either on the basis of generally accepted statements such as axioms or on the basis of previously established statements such as other theorems. A theorem is hence a logical consequence of the axioms, with a proof of the theorem being a logical argument which establishes its truth through the inference rules of a deductive system. As a result, 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 law, which is experimental.Many mathematical theorems are conditional statements, whose proofs deduce conclusions from conditions known as 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 also be interpreted differently in certain deductive systems, depending on the meanings assigned to the derivation rules and the conditional symbol (e.g., non-classical logic).
Although theorems can be written in a completely symbolic form (e.g., as propositions in propositional calculus), they are often expressed informally in a natural language such as English for better readability. 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.
In addition to the better readability, informal 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, one might even be able to substantiate a theorem by using a picture as its proof.
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 and culture: for example, as a proof is obtained, simplified or better understood, a theorem that was once difficult may become trivial. On the other hand, a deep theorem may be stated simply, 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.
Hi
I have a problem with task c)
For the Poynting vector ##\vec S## and the energy density ##\omega## I got the following:
$$\vec S= \frac{1}{\mu_0} \frac{4 I_0^2}{c \varrho} \frac{t}{c^2 t^2 - \varrho^2} \Theta(ct-\varrho)^2 \vec{e}_\varrho$$
$$\omega= \frac{1}{2} \epsilon_0 \frac{4 I_0^2...
See my image for my attempt at solving this problem. My approach varies significantly from the solution I have for this problem and I wanted to get feedback on if what I did is correct of where I went wrong. thanks.
I am trying to follow the following post.
[Mentors' note: The "following post" is from https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/12559/what-conservation-law-corresponds-to-lorentz-boosts]
I dont understand how they have got the expression for the current for translations from the general...
As far as I know, Bayes' theorem is ##P(A|B) = \frac{P(A) \times P(B|A)}{P(A) \times P(B|A) + P(\neg A) \times P(B|\neg A)}##.
I recall someone saying Bayes' theorem revolutionized probability. Bayes himself and Laplace are supposedly key figures in this revolution. I know how to apply the...
My approach,
##(0.90)^{2.2}=(1-0.1)^{2.2}-1+\dfrac{2.2×-0.1}{1!}+\dfrac{1.2 ×2.2×(-0.1)^2}{2!}+\dfrac{0.2×1.2×2.2×(-0.1)^3}{3!}+...##
## =1-0.22+0.0132-0.000088=0.7931##
There may be other approach. Insight welcome.
In this course I took it says that the larger the sample size the more likely is the sampling distribution (of the sample means, guessing here) to be normal. This they say is The Central Limit Theorem. How does this work? How does someone taking a large sample affect the sampling distribution...
Let's assume that for integers ##m## and ##n## (and integers ##x_1## and ##y_1##) the following is satisfied: $$mx_1 + ny_1 = 1$$ Then by this theorem (for some integer ##k##), if ##k|a## and ##k|b## then ##k|mx+ny## for all integers ##x## and ##y##. So it must be, $$k | mx_1 + ny_1$$ for all...
Very basic question ... Heard someone say that Noether's theorem talks about, among other things, invariance (under transformation). Further, possibilities were discussed:
1. Invariance in time
2. Invariance in space
3. Conservation of energy (kinetic?)
4. Conservation of mass
I forgot...
Theorem
1. If a series ##{a_n}## converges, then the sequence ##{a_n}## converges to ##0##.
Now, the contra does not apply, and my question is why? i.e if the the sequence ##{a_n}## converges to ##0## then the series may or may not converge correct? and if it does not converge to ##0## then it...
In geometry, there is a theorem pertaining to whether given an angle, side, and side gives 0, 1, or 2 triangles. See figure. In the figure, if x = 10sin(30) then there is exactly 1 triangle, if x > 10sin(30) then 2 triangles if x < 10sin(30) then no triangles. I think this has a theorem name or...
Took calculus of a single variable almost a decade ago where every theorem had to be accepted without proof. Can I fill these gaps by studying a rigorous multivariable/vector analysis book? My justification for this is that R^1 is just a special case of R^n. Or am I looking at this the wrong way...
Hi,
I'm not sure if I've solved the problem correctly
In order for the Implicit function theorem to be applied, the following two properties must hold ##F(x_0,z_0)=0## and ##\frac{\partial F(x_0,z_0)}{\partial z} \neq 0##. ##(x_0,z_0)=(1,2)## is a zero and ##\frac{\partial...
Hi,
I'm not sure if I've understood the task here correctly
For the Implicit function theorem, ##F(x,y)=0## must hold for all ##(x,y)## for which ##f(x,y)=f(x_0,y_0)## it follows that ##f(x,y)-f(x_0,y_0)=0## so I can apply the Implicit function theorem for these ##(x,y)##.
Then I can write...
I have watched videos on Bell's Theorem and quantum entanglement. What I don't quite get is:
if a pair of particles are created and separated and then we measure one we already know the other particle has the opposite orientation. How do we know for sure that the first particle we measure does...
Hi,
I am having problems with the following task:
My lecturer gave me the tip that I should apply the multidimensional chain rule to obtain the following transformation ##\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} \frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i}(x) \cdot x_i= \frac{d f(tx)}{dt} \big|_{t=1}##
Unfortunately, I...
Towards the end of proving Birkhoff's theorem, you have a line element of the form $$ds^2 = -b(t) \cdot (1 - a/r) dt^2 + (1 - a/r)^{-1} dr^2 + r^2 d\Omega^2$$where ##a## is some constant and ##b## is a (positive) function of ##t##. We are free to define a new coordinate ##t'## such that ##dt' =...
For this problem,
My answer for (a) and (b) are
(a): ##E_2(x) = \sqrt{9} + \frac{1}{2 \sqrt{2}}(x - 9) - \frac{1}{8 \sqrt{9^3}}(x - 9)^2##
(b): ##E_2(8) = 2.8287##
However, for (c) does someone please know whether we really need to use Taylors Theorem? For example, why can’t we just do...
Lambda = charge density
I tried first taking out the field due to the circular arc and I got $$ (lambda / 4π (epsilon knot) ) (2 sin (theta)) $$
For reference this is the arc that was provided in the question of angle 2(theta) and the tangent
What I dont understand is how can the fields be...
The tutorial question I am working on is,
(a) Attempt
We can use mean value theorem since
##(c: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}~countinity ) \implies (c: [-d, d] \rightarrow [c(-d), c(d)]~countinity)##
Thus ##c: [-d, d] \rightarrow [c(-d), c(d)] ## is differentiable on ##(-d, d)##, then...
Hello everyone,
I've been trying to understand the proof for the binomial theorem and have been using this inductive proof for understanding.
So far the proof seems consistent everywhere it's explicit with the pattern it states, but I've started wondering if I actually fully grock it because I...
The question is a problem from Leithold's calculus book. I didn't understand the (x = 5 \cos(t)). Shouldn't it be (x = 2 cos(t))? I'm referring to item b.
i tried this way. i don't know what is wrong.
I did: Work done by gravity+work done by applied force= KE(final)- KE(initial)
Work done by gravity should simply be -mgh
=100*5=-500J
For work done by applied force we know:
W=∫F⋅ds
which can also be written as
W=∫Fdscos(θ)
since F is constant i can take that out
W=Fcos(θ)∫ds
here since ive...
Is my resolution correct? I can't identify.
Calculate the line integral ∮C(2ydx+3xdy), where C is the circle x2+y2=1, using the Green's Theorem.
Green's Theorem:
Let M and N be functions of two variables x and y, such that they have continuous first partial derivatives in an open disk B in...
Using the time derivative of an operator, and expanding out, I got to this:
$$\frac{d}{dt}\langle\hat{x}\hat{p}\rangle=\frac{i}{\hbar}\left\langle\left[\hat{H},\hat{x}\hat{p}\right]\right\rangle+\left\langle\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left(\hat{x}\hat{p}\right)\right\rangle$$
Expanding using...
Want to understand how set C contains ##N## x H. H is only defined to be a set with element e and as the domain/range of function k. Is this enough information to conclude that the second set in the cartesian product W is H and not a subset of H?
My thinking is to show that ##N## and H satisfy...
I am trying to grasp how the last equation is derived. I understand everything, but the only thing problematic is why in the end, it's ##+O(\epsilon)## and not ##-O(\epsilon)##. It will be easier to directly attach the image, so please, see image attached.
Hi,
Anyone know if Cochran's Theorem can be extended to many-factor Anova, to determine the distribution of statistics used therein? Maybe similar other results can be used for determining relevant stats in use in multifactor Anova?
Statement : Let me copy and paste the statement as it appears in the text on the right.
Attempt : I could attempt nothing to prove the identity. The best I could do was to verify it for a given value of the ##a's, m, n##. I am not even sure what this identity is called but I will take the...
Hi, PF, there goes the theorem, questions, and attempt
THEOREM 4 If ##x>0##, then ##\ln x\leq{x-1}##
PROOF Let ##g(x)=\ln x-(x-1)## for ##x>0##. Then ##g(1)=0## and
##g'(x)=\displaystyle\frac{1}{x}-1\quad\begin{cases}>0&\mbox{if}\,0<x<1\\
<0&\mbox{if}\,x>1\end{cases}## (...). Thus...
My question is motivated by the proof of TH 5.13 on p 84 in the 2nd edition of Linear Algebra Done Right. (This proof differs from that in the 4th ed - online at: https://linear.axler.net/index.html chapter 5 )
In the proof we arrive at the following situation:
##T## is a linear operator on a...
Considering math as a collection of true/logically consistent statements, I see only two possibilities: either the statement is true and can be proven, which means it's a theorem. Or it's true but cannot be proven, which means it's an axiom. Is there a third possibility? Or maybe more?
I feel...
Hi all any help on this would be great I cant seem to progress with the theorem,
z= -2 + j > R sqrt (-2)'2 + (-1)'2
r = 2.24
0= Arctan(-1) = 26.57 Polar form = 2.24(cos(26.58)+jsin(26.58)
-2
Demoivre - (cos0+jsin0)'n = cosn0 +jsinno
Could some one...
in the Proof of Engel's Theorem. (3.3), p. 13:
please, how we get this step:
##L / Z(L)## evidently consists of ad-nilpotent elements and has smaller dimension than ##L##.
Using induction on ##\operatorname{dim} L##, we find that ##L / Z(L)## is nilpotent.
Thanks in advance,
For this,
From the work kinetic energy theorem, if we assume that the book and the earth is the system, and that the finial and inital speed of the system is zero, then is the work KE theorem there is no net work done on the system. However, clearly there is work done on the system is shown by...
i have this question and i just want to make sure i am on the right track as i know there are quite a few steps to this to get to the final soultions
i need to find Current at r1
voltage at r1
current at r2
voltage at r2
i have so far split this into 2 drawings so i am dealing with one power...
For this problem,
Why cannot we say that ##f(2.999999999) ≥ f(x)## and therefore absolute max at f(2.99999999999999) (without reasoning from the extreme value theorem)?
Many thanks!
According to the virial theorem,
$$\left\langle T\right\rangle =-{\frac {1}{2}}\,\sum _{k=1}^{N}{\bigl \langle }\mathbf {F} _{k}\cdot \mathbf {r} _{k}{\bigr \rangle }$$
where ##N## is the number of particles in the system and ##T## is the total kinetic energy. It is often claimed that this...
My final answer is different from the official one in the back of the book, and I can't figure out what I did wrong. This is my attempt:
Let block 1 be the vertically moving block and let block 2 be the horizontally moving one.
Also, let ##m_1 = 6.00 ~\rm{kg}##, ##m_2 = 8.00 ~\rm{kg}##, ##v_0...
I have been reading a few things about the mathematical formulation of perturbative QFT, specifically in terms of the Stuckelberg-Petermann RG, the Gell-Mann-Low RG, and their difference. Unfortunately I lack the mathematical background to understand these things in depth, and I'm having a...
I want to identify:
##S^n## with the quotient of ##O(n + 1,R)## by ##O(n,R)##.
##S^{2n+1}## with the quotient of ##U(n + 1)## by ##U(n)##.
The orbit-stabilizer theorem would give us the result, but my problem is to apply it. My problem is how to find the stabilizer.
In 1 how to define the...
My solution is different from the official solution and I don't understand what I did wrong.
Here is my solution:
The magnitude of the initial velocity is ##|v_0| = 12.0~\rm{m/s}##, so the vertical component of the initial velocity is ##v_{0-y} = (12.0 \sin{25^{\circ}})~\rm{m/s}##.
Then I use...
Hi Pfs,
Please read this paper (equation 4):
https://ncatlab.org/nla b/files/RedeiCCRRepUniqueness.pdf
It is written: Surprise! P is a projector (has to be proved)...
where can we read the proof?
In this exercise, we consider simple, nonsymmetric random walk. Suppose 1/2 < q < 1 and ##X_1, X_2, \dots## are independent random variables with ##\mathbb{P}\{X_j = 1\} = 1 − \mathbb{P}\{X_j = −1\} = q.## Let ##S_0 = 0## and ##S_n = X_1 +\dots +X_n.## Let ##F_n## denote the information...
I'm really struggling with this one. A newbie to using the residue theorem. I'm trying to solve this by factorising the denominator to find values for z0 and I have:
##z=\frac{-\sqrt{2}+i\sqrt{2}}{2}## and ##z=\frac{-\sqrt{2}-i\sqrt{2}}{2}##
I also know that sin(3π/8)=...
My thought was to break up the sentence into its equivalent form: (A ->~~A) & (~~A -> A)
From there I assumed the premise of both sides to use indirect proofs, so:
1. ~(A -> ~~A) AP
2. ~(~A or ~~A) 1 Implication
3. ~~A & ~~~A 2...
Alfvén’s theorem is very famous in plasma physics. It is also often used in astrophysics.
The link in Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfv%C3%A9n%27s_theorem
However, after a series of continuous reasoning, it seems that this theorem has problem.
What errors can be hidden in the reasoning...
But if I would assume that the efficiency of the carnot's engine is greater than the other engine and the carnot engine is driving the other engine backward as a refrigerator ,that would lead to the same contradiction hence disproving carbot's theorem! Is there something wrong I have done...