Go back
Math problem

Math problem

Posers and Puzzles

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by mtthw
Probably 🙂

I suspect proofs using the set theory definitions of cardinal numbers might be more interesting, but I don't remember much set theory!
Using the Axioms of Zermelo and Fraenkel;

Using S(A) to denote the sucessor of A and BU to denote the Big Union
For all ordinals A and B and all limit-ordinals L addition is defined with the following;

A + 0 = A
A + S(B) = S(A+B)
A + L = BU{ A+B | B in L}

Using that on 1 + 2;

1 + 2 = 1 + S(1) = S( 1 + 1 ) = S( 1 + S(0) ) = S( S( 1 + 0 ) ) = S( S( 1 ) ) = S( 2 ) = 3

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by joe shmo
Is that the problem Which leads to 1 when performing the operations, If it is, then I ve read that they are offering a reward for it proof!
i was under the impression that there was a reward for it since a while back

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by banx99
i was under the impression that there was a reward for it since a while back
Yes, I guess since 1937 here's a link for more info

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CollatzProblem.html

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Jirakon
What about the points that define a circle with a radius of infinity?

That's the first thing that came to mind. It would have to be infinite, since if it were a finite number of points, one could easily draw a horizontal line far above the last point. I'm pretty sure that's the solution.
Infinities don't exist 🙁

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Just because all points have finite coordinates does not mean there is a 'y-max'

Otherwise your "proof" could be used to prove that the set of points on x=0 is finite.
I disagree. His proof only proves that the line x=1 does not intersect two of the points in that set.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Palynka
I don't see why what I said implies the set must be bounded. Take the Euclidean axis. No line that you can draw or represent as a function intersects a point of those axes only at infinity.
But there are lines that only intersect one of the axes and not the other.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Prove, that 1+2=3

Is this provable? Yes it is.
Most of math students, from lower grade of university, cannot. Can you?
1+2 is defined as 3 is it not?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Line may or maynot extend to infinity. It may be a small line. So circle with Infinite radius or similar figures dont hold good IMHO.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
1+2 is defined as 3 is it not?
No, not more then 2+3=5, because you cannot define every combinations of a, b, and c so a+b=c.

Better to use the axioms and go from there.

However, addition is a defined operation, is it not?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Haha.
Wanna play chess?!

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by FabianFnas
No, not more then 2+3=5, because you cannot define every combinations of a, b, and c so a+b=c.

Better to use the axioms and go from there.

However, addition is a defined operation, is it not?
I would think yes more than 2+3=5, but not more than 1+3=4. 1+n gives you the number in the sequence that comes after n.