Previous: Anyone know lambda calculus?
true = [math]\lambda t. \lambda f. t[/math]
fls = [math]\lambda t. \lambda f. f[/math]
Reduce the following lambda term: tru a b
Suppose the logical and operator was defined as the following: and = [math]\lambda b. \lambda c. b c fls[/math]
Reduce the term: and tru tru.
Other urls found in this thread:
harvardprostateknowledge.org
fneuron-mc.myselph.de
jsfiddle.net
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Is there a method for this or am I just supposed to 'see' it?
Okay, I figured it out.
>try some guessing to get the form of a difference equation to describe the series
>create a system functional from the difference equation
>factorise into partial fractions
>turn each fraction into geometric series
If you have m vectors in since vector space Rn, where m > n, how can you tell if m spans Rn?
So when you put the vectors into a system of equations and reduce it to row echelon form, how can you tell if the do or don't span?
Can someone pls recommend an advanced book on R?
sifting algorithm
I'm a stats major and I have to take Calc II this Spring. I didn't do very well in my calc class, C+, granted I wasn't as motivated as a student as I am now. What sort of stuff should I be focusing on before I go into this class?
>Reduce the term: and tru tru.
How? You haven't given any reduction rules.
are the field "axioms" axioms or definitions?
i understand them being axioms for R, but in most cases you have to prove them right?
>are the field "axioms" axioms or definitions?
The axioms are axioms. The field is defined by those axioms.