Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Composites, and neat relation
Replies: 18   Last Post: Sep 14, 2004 3:38 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Dik T. Winter

Posts: 7,899
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: Composites, and neat relation
Posted: Sep 13, 2004 7:55 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply


In article <3c65f87.0409131406.6b756f08@posting.google.com> jstevh@msn.com (James Harris) writes:
> Paul Murray <paul@murray.net> wrote in message news:<fnc1d.1286704$y4.226290@news.easynews.com>...
...
> > >> and I started thinking about
> > >>
> > >> [x] + [x + 1/k] = [2x]
> > >>
> > >> also in reals, with k>1, and it turns out you need x>1 as well, which
> > >> I was thinking about didn't put down before.
> > >
> > > You can have x less than 1 as what's needed is
> > >
> > > xk + 1 >= k
> >
> > Still false.
>
> You're right. The requirement is that x>=1.

Still wrong. But as you apparently do not read what I write...
I have posted a counterexample already (x = 5/3, k = 6).
Moreover, it has already been proven that if the relation holds
for a value x, it also holds for x-1.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; <a href="http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/">http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/</a>




Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.