|
Well-ordering Principle
In mathematics, the well-ordering principle states that every non-empty set of positive integers contains a least element. In other words, the set of positive integers is well-ordered by its "natural" or "magnitude" order in which x precedes y if and only if y is either x or the sum of x and some positive integer (other orderings include the ordering 2, 4, 6, ...; and 1, 3, 5, ...). The phrase "well-ordering principle" is sometimes taken to be synonymous with the "well-ordering theorem". On other occasions it is understood to be the proposition that the set of integers \ contains a well-ordered subset, called the natural numbers, in which every nonempty subset contains a least element. Properties Depending on the framework in which the natural numbers are introduced, this (second order) property of the set of natural numbers is either an axiom or a provable theorem. For example: * In Peano arithmetic, second-order arithmetic and related systems, and indeed in most (not necessar ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Mathematics
Mathematics is an area of knowledge that includes the topics of numbers, formulas and related structures, shapes and the spaces in which they are contained, and quantities and their changes. These topics are represented in modern mathematics with the major subdisciplines of number theory, algebra, geometry, and mathematical analysis, analysis, respectively. There is no general consensus among mathematicians about a common definition for their academic discipline. Most mathematical activity involves the discovery of properties of mathematical object, abstract objects and the use of pure reason to proof (mathematics), prove them. These objects consist of either abstraction (mathematics), abstractions from nature orin modern mathematicsentities that are stipulated to have certain properties, called axioms. A ''proof'' consists of a succession of applications of inference rule, deductive rules to already established results. These results include previously proved theorems, axioms ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Contrapositive
In logic and mathematics, contraposition refers to the inference of going from a conditional statement into its logically equivalent contrapositive, and an associated proof method known as proof by contraposition. The contrapositive of a statement has its antecedent and consequent inverted and flipped. Conditional statement P \rightarrow Q. In formulas: the contrapositive of P \rightarrow Q is \neg Q \rightarrow \neg P . If ''P'', Then ''Q''. — If not ''Q'', Then not ''P''. ''"''If ''it is raining,'' then ''I wear my coat" —'' "If ''I don't wear my coat,'' then ''it isn't raining."'' The law of contraposition says that a conditional statement is true if, and only if, its contrapositive is true. The contrapositive ( \neg Q \rightarrow \neg P ) can be compared with three other statements: ;Inversion (the inverse), \neg P \rightarrow \neg Q:"If ''it is not raining,'' then ''I don't wear my coat''." Unlike the contrapositive, the inverse's truth value is not at all ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Wellfoundedness
In mathematics, a binary relation ''R'' is called well-founded (or wellfounded) on a class ''X'' if every non-empty subset ''S'' ⊆ ''X'' has a minimal element with respect to ''R'', that is, an element ''m'' not related by ''s R m'' (for instance, "''s'' is not smaller than ''m''") for any ''s'' ∈ ''S''. In other words, a relation is well founded if :(\forall S \subseteq X)\; \neq \emptyset \implies (\exists m \in S) (\forall s \in S) \lnot(s \mathrel m) Some authors include an extra condition that ''R'' is set-like, i.e., that the elements less than any given element form a set. Equivalently, assuming the axiom of dependent choice, a relation is well-founded when it contains no infinite descending chains, which can be proved when there is no infinite sequence ''x''0, ''x''1, ''x''2, ... of elements of ''X'' such that ''x''''n''+1 ''R'' ''x''n for every natural number ''n''. In order theory, a partial order is called well-f ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Integral Domain
In mathematics, specifically abstract algebra, an integral domain is a nonzero commutative ring in which the product of any two nonzero elements is nonzero. Integral domains are generalizations of the ring of integers and provide a natural setting for studying divisibility. In an integral domain, every nonzero element ''a'' has the cancellation property, that is, if , an equality implies . "Integral domain" is defined almost universally as above, but there is some variation. This article follows the convention that rings have a multiplicative identity, generally denoted 1, but some authors do not follow this, by not requiring integral domains to have a multiplicative identity. Noncommutative integral domains are sometimes admitted. This article, however, follows the much more usual convention of reserving the term "integral domain" for the commutative case and using "domain" for the general case including noncommutative rings. Some sources, notably Lang, use the term ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Least Upper Bound Axiom
In mathematics, the least-upper-bound property (sometimes called completeness or supremum property or l.u.b. property) is a fundamental property of the real numbers. More generally, a partially ordered set has the least-upper-bound property if every non-empty subset of with an upper bound has a ''least'' upper bound (supremum) in . Not every (partially) ordered set has the least upper bound property. For example, the set \mathbb of all rational numbers with its natural order does ''not'' have the least upper bound property. The least-upper-bound property is one form of the completeness axiom for the real numbers, and is sometimes referred to as Dedekind completeness.Willard says that an ordered space "X is Dedekind complete if every subset of X having an upper bound has a least upper bound." (pp. 124-5, Problem 17E.) It can be used to prove many of the fundamental results of real analysis, such as the intermediate value theorem, the Bolzano–Weierstrass theorem, the extreme val ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Saunders Mac Lane
Saunders Mac Lane (4 August 1909 – 14 April 2005) was an American mathematician who co-founded category theory with Samuel Eilenberg. Early life and education Mac Lane was born in Norwich, Connecticut, near where his family lived in Taftville.. He was christened "Leslie Saunders MacLane", but "Leslie" fell into disuse because his parents, Donald MacLane and Winifred Saunders, came to dislike it. He began inserting a space into his surname because his first wife found it difficult to type the name without a space. He was the oldest of three brothers; one of his brothers, Gerald MacLane, also became a mathematics professor at Rice University and Purdue University. Another sister died as a baby. His father and grandfather were both ministers; his grandfather had been a Presbyterian, but was kicked out of the church for believing in evolution, and his father was a Congregationalist. His mother, Winifred, studied at Mount Holyoke College and taught English, Latin, and mathematics. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Garrett Birkhoff
Garrett Birkhoff (January 19, 1911 – November 22, 1996) was an American mathematician. He is best known for his work in lattice theory. The mathematician George Birkhoff (1884–1944) was his father. Life The son of the mathematician George David Birkhoff, Garrett was born in Princeton, New Jersey. He began the Harvard University BA course in 1928 after less than seven years of prior formal education. Upon completing his Harvard BA in 1932, he went to Cambridge University to study mathematical physics but switched to studying abstract algebra under Philip Hall. While visiting the University of Munich, he met Carathéodory who pointed him towards two important texts, Van der Waerden on abstract algebra and Speiser on group theory. Birkhoff held no Ph.D., a qualification British higher education did not emphasize at that time, and did not even bother obtaining an M.A. Nevertheless, after being a member of Harvard's Society of Fellows, 1933–36, he spent the rest o ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Infinite Descent
In mathematics, a proof by infinite descent, also known as Fermat's method of descent, is a particular kind of proof by contradiction used to show that a statement cannot possibly hold for any number, by showing that if the statement were to hold for a number, then the same would be true for a smaller number, leading to an infinite descent and ultimately a contradiction. It is a method which relies on the well-ordering principle, and is often used to show that a given equation, such as a Diophantine equation, has no solutions. Typically, one shows that if a solution to a problem existed, which in some sense was related to one or more natural numbers, it would necessarily imply that a second solution existed, which was related to one or more 'smaller' natural numbers. This in turn would imply a third solution related to smaller natural numbers, implying a fourth solution, therefore a fifth solution, and so on. However, there cannot be an infinity of ever-smaller natural numbers, a ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Fermat
Pierre de Fermat (; between 31 October and 6 December 1607 – 12 January 1665) was a French mathematician who is given credit for early developments that led to infinitesimal calculus, including his technique of adequality. In particular, he is recognized for his discovery of an original method of finding the greatest and the smallest ordinates of curved lines, which is analogous to that of differential calculus, then unknown, and his research into number theory. He made notable contributions to analytic geometry, probability, and optics. He is best known for his Fermat's principle for light propagation and his Fermat's Last Theorem in number theory, which he described in a note at the margin of a copy of Diophantus' ''Arithmetica''. He was also a lawyer at the ''Parlement'' of Toulouse, France. Biography Fermat was born in 1607 in Beaumont-de-Lomagne, France—the late 15th-century mansion where Fermat was born is now a museum. He was from Gascony, where his father, Dominique ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Minimal Criminal
In mathematics, a minimal counterexample is the smallest example which falsifies a claim, and a proof by minimal counterexample is a method of proof which combines the use of a minimal counterexample with the ideas of proof by induction and proof by contradiction. More specifically, in trying to prove a proposition ''P'', one first assumes by contradiction that it is false, and that therefore there must be at least one counterexample. With respect to some idea of size (which may need to be chosen carefully), one then concludes that there is such a counterexample ''C'' that is ''minimal''. In regard to the argument, ''C'' is generally something quite hypothetical (since the truth of ''P'' excludes the possibility of ''C''), but it may be possible to argue that if ''C'' existed, then it would have some definite properties which, after applying some reasoning similar to that in an inductive proof, would lead to a contradiction, thereby showing that the proposition ''P'' is indeed true ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Complete Induction
Mathematical induction is a method for proving that a statement ''P''(''n'') is true for every natural number ''n'', that is, that the infinitely many cases ''P''(0), ''P''(1), ''P''(2), ''P''(3), ... all hold. Informal metaphors help to explain this technique, such as falling dominoes or climbing a ladder: A proof by induction consists of two cases. The first, the base case, proves the statement for ''n'' = 0 without assuming any knowledge of other cases. The second case, the induction step, proves that ''if'' the statement holds for any given case ''n'' = ''k'', ''then'' it must also hold for the next case ''n'' = ''k'' + 1. These two steps establish that the statement holds for every natural number ''n''. The base case does not necessarily begin with ''n'' = 0, but often with ''n'' = 1, and possibly with any fixed natural number ''n'' = ''N'', establishing the truth of the statement for all natu ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Regularity
In mathematics, the axiom of regularity (also known as the axiom of foundation) is an axiom of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory that states that every non-empty set ''A'' contains an element that is disjoint from ''A''. In first-order logic, the axiom reads: : \forall x\,(x \neq \varnothing \rightarrow \exists y(y \in x\ \land y \cap x = \varnothing)). The axiom of regularity together with the axiom of pairing implies that no set is an element of itself, and that there is no infinite sequence (''an'') such that ''ai+1'' is an element of ''ai'' for all ''i''. With the axiom of dependent choice (which is a weakened form of the axiom of choice), this result can be reversed: if there are no such infinite sequences, then the axiom of regularity is true. Hence, in this context the axiom of regularity is equivalent to the sentence that there are no downward infinite membership chains. The axiom was introduced by ; it was adopted in a formulation closer to the one found in contemporary te ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
