Proof Introduction

Hello,

Does anybody have any advice on writing definitions for a scientific proof?
 

matt grime

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
9,394
3
definitions are given, you deduce things from them. the only advice you need is to do some, practice them, and read a lot of examples.
 
1,349
2
"define x as ..."
"let y be ..." ??
"denote x ..."
 

mathwonk

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
10,732
909
definitions should be reserved for concepts that are found to be important, even central.
 
How can one tell when the definitions are in conjunction with the hypotheses?
 
163
0
There is no such thing as a scientific proof. I suppose you mean mathematical or logical proof.
 

matt grime

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
9,394
3
blackscience said:
How can one tell when the definitions are in conjunction with the hypotheses?

by reading them and thinking (though i am guessing what you mean by conjunction)
 

selfAdjoint

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,764
5
blackscience said:
How can one tell when the definitions are in conjunction with the hypotheses?
The definitions have to be very well stated so there is no fuzzyness in what they connote. This is called well-defined. One of the best ways to get well-defined objects in mathematics is with axioms. You set up a small number of statements, called axioms, describing the thing you want to prove theorems about, and then you prove two special theorems:
1. The axioms don't contradict each other. (Consistency)
2. There actually is something that the axioms describe (Existence)

If you can do that, the object is well-defined, and you can make theorems about it by referrring to the axioms. By view of your consistency proof, this won't lead you to contradictions, and by view of the existence proof, you won't be talking about nothing at all.
 
If I were to use Newton's work on Principa as a example. He used 8 definitions before he wrote his 3 axioms or laws of motion. Now I have written an equation on a natural phenomenon and I am wondering what parts I should define before I start writing the axioms. Actually I already started writing the axioms but I feel like I am ahead of myself. Because I think the definition will give the proof a clear understanding of the natural phenomenon.
 
1,349
2
well then just write the definition as "x is position" etc.
or the set A = {...|... }
 

Related Threads for: Proof Introduction

  • Posted
Replies
2
Views
545
  • Posted
Replies
2
Views
768
  • Posted
Replies
3
Views
673
  • Posted
Replies
3
Views
425
  • Posted
Replies
6
Views
368
  • Posted
Replies
1
Views
326
  • Posted
Replies
1
Views
540
  • Posted
Replies
1
Views
294

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Hot Threads

Top