Proof of the equality of men through induction.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Physicist7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction Proof
AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores whether the statement "All men are created equal" can be proven using mathematical induction. The initial approach involves defining a series of statements about equality among men, with a basis and induction step outlined. However, participants question the validity of applying mathematical induction to a philosophical assertion, suggesting that equality among individuals cannot be established through mathematical means. The conversation highlights the struggle of adapting to university-level mathematics and the philosophical implications of the equality statement. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards recognizing the philosophical nature of the claim rather than a mathematical proof.
Physicist7
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hey guys,

I was wondering is it possible to prove the statement , that "All men are created equal" through the proof method of induction. If so how?, if not, why? I just don't know where to begin. This course is a killer. I am attending the Univeristy of Toronto for my first year and the math is very different then high school, and the first year Calc course is actually called Analysis I where we use Michael Spivaks book. It is different and so I am struggling but I don't want to give up! Thanks for the help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Basically how would I approach this problem?
 
Nothing eh?
 
I'll give it a try...

Statement: S(n) = The man n is created equal to man n-1 and the man 0 is created equal to man 0.

Basis: S(0) = The man 0 is created equal to man 0. Correct.
S(1) = The man 1 is created equal to man 0. Correct.

Induction: S(n+1) = S(n)
The man n+1 is created equal to man n. = The man n is created equal to man n-1.
The man n+1 is created equal to man n. = The man n-1 is created equal to man n.
The man (n+1+n-1) is created equal to man (n+n).
The man 2n is created equal to man 2n. Correct.

I don't think that is totally correct but hmm...its what I could come up with at the moment :smile:
 
Hmm I think that's getting me somewhere though. Thanks cefarix, I appreciate it!
 
Are you guys serious??! Isn't the statement "all men are created equal" a philosophical statement rather then a mathematical one?? Surely there is no mathematical argument you can use to prove that just because the first k men were created equal, that this somehow emplied the (k+1)st man is equal to one of the 1st k?? What does it mean for men to be equal anyway?
:confused: :confused:
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top