How can I improve my proof skills with internet resources?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Logical Dog
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around improving proof skills, particularly in the context of mathematical proofs involving divisibility. Participants explore various aspects of proof writing, including assumptions, structure, and the use of LaTeX for formatting mathematical expressions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the correctness of a proof that assumes certain variables are non-zero, indicating a potential flaw in the argument.
  • Another participant discusses whether zero can be a divisor in the context of divisibility, asserting that it cannot, which raises questions about the relevance of certain cases in the proof.
  • Some participants suggest that the order of statements in the proof could be improved for clarity, emphasizing the need for logical flow in presenting arguments.
  • A proposed direct proof is presented, outlining a clearer structure for demonstrating the divisibility relationship, while also noting that integers are assumed to be non-zero in such contexts.
  • Several participants share resources and tips for using LaTeX effectively, expressing their own experiences and fears related to programming and formatting mathematical content.
  • There are mentions of specific LaTeX commands and tools that can assist in writing mathematical proofs, with some participants expressing a willingness to learn and improve their skills.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the assumptions made in the proof, particularly regarding the treatment of zero. There is no consensus on the correctness of the original proof, and multiple perspectives on proof structure and formatting are presented.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions highlight the limitations of the original proof due to assumptions about variable values, and there are unresolved questions about the implications of including zero in divisibility arguments.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals looking to enhance their proof-writing skills, particularly in mathematics, as well as those interested in learning LaTeX for formatting mathematical expressions.

Logical Dog
Messages
362
Reaction score
97
Is this proof even correct?! It places assumption on a and c NOT BEING ZERO.
Thanks in advance. I am new to proofs.
4o2b18S.png
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
If a|b, can a be zero?
If c|d, can c be zero?

If not, that case is not relevant for the proposition.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Logical Dog
mfb said:
If a|b, can a be zero?
If c|d, can c be zero?

If not, that case is not relevant for the proposition.

No, I think. Nonumber can be divided by zero. Edot: I was confused because it said all are in integers

Any other (creative) way to do this proof? :smile: (using a direct proof method)
 
Last edited:
Bipolar Demon said:
No, I think. No real number can be divided by zero
No number can be divided by zero. Zero doesn't belong to multiplicative groups by definition of the group properties and zero as the additive neutral element.

The other way around, if multiplication (of all elements including zero) doesn't form a group, one can have ##a\cdot b =0## ##a## and ##b## are then called zero divisors. E.g. the remainders of divisions by a non-prime have zero divisors, ##2\cdot 3 \equiv 0 \mod (6)##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Logical Dog
It looks good to me. Maybe it could use a little word-smithing.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Logical Dog
The order of your proof needs work. You say
"Thus ##\frac{bd}{ac} = l, l \in \mathbb{Z}##"
Then you talk some more about ##\frac{bd}{ac}##, which should come before saying, "Thus..."
Here's what I think is a more direct proof:
a | b and c | d
Then b = ka and d = mc, for integers k and m.
So bd = kmac
Hence ac | bd.​
When we say that a number a divides another b, both numbers are assumed to be integers, and a is assumed to be nonzero.
Edit: Fixed some typos caused by switching letters.
In the future, please post your work here directly, rather than as an image. Everything you did can be done using TeX. If you are uncertain how to use this, take a look at our tutorial, under INFO --> Help/How-tos. The LaTeX tutorial is listed there.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Logical Dog
Mark44 said:
The order of your proof needs work. You say
"Thus ##\frac{bd}{ac} = l, l \in \mathbb{Z}##"
Then you talk some more about ##\frac{bd}{ac}##, which should come before saying, "Thus..."
Here's what I think is a more direct proof:
a | b and c | d
Then b = ka and d = mc, for integers k and m.
So bd = kmac
Hence ac | bd.​
When we say that a number a divides another b, both numbers are assumed to be integers, and a is assumed to be nonzero.

In the future, please post your work here directly, rather than as an image. Everything you did can be done using TeX. If you are uncertain how to use this, take a look at our tutorial, under INFO --> Help/How-tos. The LaTeX tutorial is listed there.

ok, I will learn it. :-)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
Bipolar Demon said:
thanks a lot...I am just scared of having to program anything (last time I programmed things didn't go too well). I will ytry it :-)
You can do a lot with just a few tricks:
Fractions: ##\frac{ab}{cd}##
Script: ##\frac{ab}{cd}##

Exponents, subscripts: ##c_1x^2##
Script: ##c_1x^2##

Integrals: ##\int_a^b f(t) dt##
Script: ##\int_a^b f(t) dt##

These are probably the ones I use the most

Matrices: ##\begin{bmatrix} 2 & 3 \\ 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix}##
Script: ##\begin{bmatrix} 2 & 3 \\ 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix}##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Logical Dog
  • #11
Bipolar Demon said:
thanks a lot...I am just scared of having to program anything (last time I programmed things didn't go too well). I will ytry it :-)
The best thing is ##\text {## math ##} ## is fast to type.
I even downloaded me a tiny program (AutoHotkey) that allows me to add shortcuts to my keyboard. E.g. I have Alt+f which makes me \frac{}{} for quotients. One just have to ensure not to overload the shortcuts one usually uses, like Ctrl+c. But even then, this little helper can easily be switched on and off.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Logical Dog
  • #12
Bipolar Demon said:
thanks a lot...I am just scared of having to program anything (last time I programmed things didn't go too well). I will ytry it :-)
the best way to learn this is That the internet make all the work :biggrin:o_O
https://www.codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Logical Dog

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K