Isaac Kleinman
Reputation
358
Top tag
Next privilege 500 Rep.
Access review queues
 Nov14 comment Absolute Value Properties Forgot about the most basic case somehow.. Nov14 asked Absolute Value Properties Oct14 awarded Popular Question Sep18 awarded Popular Question Jul29 revised “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction grammar correction Jul29 accepted “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction Jul28 answered “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction Jul26 comment “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction What is the justification for proving a universal statement by means of providing a proof for a single $k$? Jul26 suggested rejected edit on “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction Jul17 comment When do I use “arbitrary” and/or “fixed” in a proof? Are you confusing arbitrary and fixed with free and bound variables? Jul17 comment “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction @GitGud: Are you saying the same or opposite thing as Qiaochu Yuan math.stackexchange.com/a/46728/11444 ? Jul17 revised “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction changed tag Jul17 comment “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction I don't understand your answer. Jul17 comment “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction Is that the case? Why does he say "arbitrary but fixed" instead of just "let $k$ be an integer"? Jul17 asked “Fixed $k$” in Mathematical Induction Jun10 comment Prove Satisfiability of Property by Set I'd love to chat whenever you're up to it: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/9178/satisfiability Jun9 comment Prove Satisfiability of Property by Set I thought that was the meaning of my question. :( My question was based on an exercise in Apostol's book. Now I'm not certain my understanding of the terminology is correct. I did not understand "is satisfied by the rational numbers" to mean "is true of the rational numbers"; I understood it to mean "no reals beyond the rationals are needed for the property hold". Please correct me if I'm wrong. Jun9 comment Prove Satisfiability of Property by Set @amWhy: I'm trying to prove that there is no implication from the archimedean property that there are real numbers which are not rational, are we on the same page? Jun9 comment Prove Satisfiability of Property by Set You are proving "For all rational a,x,y, if a≤x