Friday, December 6, 2013
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
makeup exam in the testing center
The makeup exam will take place in the testing center Wednesday Dec 4 and Thursday Dec 5. This is a very busy time in the testing center. You will need to be in and out before 3pm.
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Another writing assignment question
.....I cannot seem to get the proof of if m and k are not co-prime
numbers. If you could explain to me how to start or give me any insight
it would be appreciated!
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Well, you should carefully read the Theorem Statement section in wikipedia article on the Chinese Remainder Theorem, particularly the part following the fact that simultaneous congruences can be solved even when the divisors are not pairwise coprime. Then I would reflect on what the existence and/or nonexistence of solutions to the simultaneous congruences says about the elements in the partition Pm.Pk
Writing Assignment Question
Hello Professor Taylor,
I am writing to get a bit of clarity of what we are proving in this
paper. From the blog instructions, I gather that we are trying to prove
that:
"Given two integers x and y, we say that the partition P separates x and y, if [x]≠[y]."
and then from 2)
given a)
we are to prove b), c), and d)
Again, I am just writing to see if I am understanding this
correctly or if I am off base here. Thank you for your time and have a
good afternoon.
####################################################################
Well, no. Everything you are to prove is in item 2), and the four parts are somewhat independent. The statement
"Given two integers x and y, we say that the partition P separates x and y, if [x]≠[y]."
is the definition of what it means for a partition to separate two elements x,y.
By the way, note that I made an additional comment inline to item 2a) on the writing assignment announcement below.
By the way, note that I made an additional comment inline to item 2a) on the writing assignment announcement below.
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
question and answer
Hello
Im having trouble with problem #17 in
section 4.4, the book gives a hint so i thought in the back so I thought
to prove that R is reflexive, antisymmetric and transitive on A. Is
there an another route that might not take as long or Im I going about
it ok??
Thank you
##########
##########
************************************************
17. If a subset of a partially ordered set has exactly one minimal element, must that element be a smallest element? Give either a proof or a counter example to justify your answer.
************************************************
As you say, the back of the book gives a relation, a subset and a point in that subset that they claim is acounter example. The trick is to show that the relation is a partial order, and that the point and subset have the needed properties.
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Online LaTeX editor
Hey, this link is a useful equation editor for creating image files of mathematical text
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
