>Suppose, for a moment,
Suppose, for a moment
Other urls found in this thread:
sciencemag.org
twitter.com
>WLOG
>let
No, I will not let
>Consider
>this follows directly from the definition, indeed-
>just assume, for now,
>the bodies
>it must be the case that
...
>hence,
>therefore
>thus
>pure math
>it can be shown, that
>summa summarum
...
love the lambert product log
itt. brainlets who think they're smart but who haven't even realized that the platonic mathematical realm is more real than this universe.
>For the sake of this exercise, let us suppose
>in particular,
>allahu akbar
>let (X,d) be a metric space
If I changed one of your axioms, would you die?
For all
>if and only if
>If this is the case, we are done. Otherwise,
...
>we show...
>single author
>Exercise: finish the proof
>otherwise
>what follows is 7 pages of mental rape
which theorem, Veeky Forums ?
>canonical
>generic
>natural
Why do so many authors use mathiness as an excuse for terrible writing?
>all else being equal
their uni had a shit writing program that they didn't have any interest in anyway
>the proof is beyond the scope of this book.
>proof's last sentence begins with indeed
>Allow your suspension of disbelief to kick in for the next few statements
>now stay with me here
>'cause this is about to get spicy
>allow yourself to view this through the mind of a child
>hey guys anthony fantano, the internet's busiest music nerd
Hecke's theorem. If the generalized Riemann hypothesis is true, then the proof is a half page long. If it's false, it's 11 pages long.
>the previous three lemma are then invalidated
>(why?)
>scoopert doopert
Fucking kosmala
>the solution is completely arbitrary
>submit paper
>journal complains about use of "we" and "our" in single-author paper
>can't be arsed to rewrite paper
>add cat as coauthor
the absolute madman
sciencemag.org
kek
This gets me every time I read it
...
It would be very painful
>Assume
>(WHY?)
with no survivors!
>you should be able to
problematic*
>imagine, for a moment, system in Xth dimensional space
> >'cause this is about to get spicy
>the proof is trivial
>left as an exercise
>ayo ayo! hol'up hol'up!
>*Smacks Lips*
>lemmee get dis straight
>Suppose, for a contradiction, that
>Let's say that..
platonic forms are a philosophically incoherent concept
>The argument goes as follows.
>assume
>for each
>the n-1 case
>therefore
>such that
>there exists
>if and only if
>is a subset of
>is an element of
>the set of all real numbers
>coproduct over
>recall
>the proof for this is in my other book
>Ben di tree while it young, cause when it old it go brek