Sep
16
reviewed Approve suggested edit on Finding example of a special type of continuous differentiable function
Sep
16
reviewed Approve suggested edit on Whether the sequence following is convergent?
Sep
15
reviewed Approve suggested edit on Finding which base number given operations
Sep
14
reviewed Reject suggested edit on Question about a passage in the Bicommutant Theorem's proof.
Sep
14
reviewed Approve suggested edit on Radius of curvature polar
Sep
14
reviewed Approve suggested edit on Distribution of balls
Sep
14
reviewed Approve suggested edit on Counting Enumeration Problem
Sep
12
reviewed Edit suggested edit on condition for transitivity
Sep
12
revised condition for transitivity
removed an unneeded package; latexing
Sep
12
reviewed Approve suggested edit on need to prove an inequality for calc 3
Sep
12
revised Proof of special case of Fermat's Last Theorem
changing title, adding category. I hope the title is not too pompous. If so, then change it
Sep
12
answered Negation of a proposition of the form “not(p) & q”
Sep
12
comment Negation of a proposition of the form “not(p) & q”
yes, I think this is correct
Sep
12
comment Negation of a proposition of the form “not(p) & q”
If that what you expressed in English is "p & not(q)" then it is wrong because you have to express "p | not(q)". I think you have actually expressed "p & not(q)", so it is wrong.
Sep
12
comment Negation of a proposition of the form “not(p) & q”
not( not(p) & q) <=> (p | not(q)) or better $$\neg(\neg p \land q) \Leftrightarrow ( p \lor \neg q) $$
Sep
12
comment Showing Surjectivitity of $f(x) = x^3$
but then you should mention that it is countinous if this is a premise for you conclusion
Sep
12
comment coin problem with two coins, inductive proof
If you want somebody to discuss your proof it would be easier if you number your equation/inequations. I think you made a mistake, you cannot get $pab-pa-b \ \neq \ mpa + b(na+p-1)$ from the former equation. it should be $pab-pa-b \ \neq \ npa + b(mp+p-1)$ Also you should make your naming of variables consistent In the first part you use $n$ for the multiplier of $a$ int he second part you use $m$. This makes it more difficult to read the proof.
Sep
12
revised Computing a messy convolution
added 7 characters in body
Sep
12
revised Computing a messy convolution
fractions in TeX
Sep
12
revised Finding the number of two digit numbers
deleted 1 character in body