Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: February 4, 2025, 1:54 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Need a proof (real analysis)
#4
RE: Need a proof (real analysis)
(July 31, 2012 at 6:26 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: [quote='Categories+Sheaves' pid='317718' dateline='1343773102']
You can do the first conjecture in one line by multiplying both sides by (1/3)g, yielding
(a/3)g + (b/3)g +(1/3)g >= (a/3 + b/3 + 1/3)g

You've improperly switched some negatives to positives there, I think.
Ah. Indeed I did.
So that gives us (a-1)g + (b)g >= (a + b - 1)g as long as a > 1 (negatives makes this harder :/ ).
By conjecture #2...
1-0 >= ag - (a-1)g and so (a-1)g >= ag - 1
So just using concavity isn't enough...
(July 31, 2012 at 6:26 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: Any proof will do, it's a useful lemma for my girlfriend's research.
Because there's nothing more interesting than another person's question: what's the problem/literature you're looking at?
So these philosophers were all like, "That Kant apply universally!" And then these mathematicians were all like, "Oh yes it Kan!"
Reply



Messages In This Thread
Need a proof (real analysis) - by CliveStaples - July 31, 2012 at 5:35 pm
RE: Need a proof (real analysis) - by CliveStaples - July 31, 2012 at 6:26 pm
RE: Need a proof (real analysis) - by Categories+Sheaves - July 31, 2012 at 6:47 pm
RE: Need a proof (real analysis) - by CliveStaples - July 31, 2012 at 6:54 pm
RE: Need a proof (real analysis) - by CliveStaples - July 31, 2012 at 7:30 pm
RE: Need a proof (real analysis) - by CliveStaples - August 2, 2012 at 10:11 pm



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)