Writing Computations Clearly In Proofs

  • Thread starter Thread starter jmjlt88
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proofs Writing
jmjlt88
Messages
94
Reaction score
0
Here's a quick question concerning writing clearly in proofs. I am revising and refining some of my proofs [this is for a self-study], and I across a problem where I had to prove that f: G->G defined by f(x)=axa-1 is a automorphism. To show it has the homomorphism property, I had to do some calculations. Which of the following would be more accepted?

METHOD 1

Evaulating f(xy), we get,

(1) f(xy)=axya-1
(2) =axeya-1 [property of e]
(3) =axa-1aya-1 [property of inverses]
(4) =f(x)f(y).
Hence, f(xy)=f(x)f(y).

METHOD 2

We have that f(xy)=axya-1. Then f(x)f(y)=axa-1aya-1=axya-1. Hence, f(xy)=f(x)f(y).

Thanks! :)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I like (2) better in this case.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
565
Replies
0
Views
394
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Back
Top