<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Calculational proofs are usually direct</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/</link>
	<description>Programming, Algorithms, and Mathematics</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: jff</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-1534</link>
		<dc:creator>jff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:39:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-1534</guid>
		<description>Jane,

Each step in the proof format I use has the form:

  A
R { hint }
  B    .

This means that A is related with B by relation R, and the reason is shown in the hint. If I instantiate R with equality, I get:

  A
= { hint }
  B  ,

which means that A=B.

Similarly, if I use the arrow, as in
 
   A
&lt;= {hint}
   B   ,

then it means that B implies A.

***

In this particular example, I am using the contrapositive of the so-called Leibniz rule:

  f(a) =/= f(b)   =&gt;  a =/= b .

In words, if the value of f(a) is different from f(b), then a must be different from b.

I hope this helps,
Joao</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jane,</p>
<p>Each step in the proof format I use has the form:</p>
<p>  A<br />
R { hint }<br />
  B    .</p>
<p>This means that A is related with B by relation R, and the reason is shown in the hint. If I instantiate R with equality, I get:</p>
<p>  A<br />
= { hint }<br />
  B  ,</p>
<p>which means that A=B.</p>
<p>Similarly, if I use the arrow, as in</p>
<p>   A<br />
< = {hint}<br />
   B   ,</p>
<p>then it means that B implies A.</p>
<p>***</p>
<p>In this particular example, I am using the contrapositive of the so-called Leibniz rule:</p>
<p>  f(a) =/= f(b)   =>  a =/= b .</p>
<p>In words, if the value of f(a) is different from f(b), then a must be different from b.</p>
<p>I hope this helps,<br />
Joao</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jane Forrester</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-1532</link>
		<dc:creator>Jane Forrester</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:19:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-1532</guid>
		<description>I am just a layperson who's interested in logic. Your proof looks very intuitive and direct, and I have to admit it's more elegant.

However, I have a small question from my ignorance on your notation.

In-between the statements, there are lines that explain the transformation. All of them start with an equal sign except the second one, which is left-arrow. What does that mean and why is this the only one?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am just a layperson who&#8217;s interested in logic. Your proof looks very intuitive and direct, and I have to admit it&#8217;s more elegant.</p>
<p>However, I have a small question from my ignorance on your notation.</p>
<p>In-between the statements, there are lines that explain the transformation. All of them start with an equal sign except the second one, which is left-arrow. What does that mean and why is this the only one?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jff</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-1306</link>
		<dc:creator>jff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 21:34:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-1306</guid>
		<description>Mike,

The so-called Leibniz rule (also called 'substitution of equals by equals') states that, for all a, b, and function f:

   a = b  =&gt;  f.a = f.b     .

Hence, you can see the first step as a mutual implication where, in one direction, function f is taking the square root, and in the other direction, function f corresponds to squaring.

Thanks for your comment!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike,</p>
<p>The so-called Leibniz rule (also called &#8217;substitution of equals by equals&#8217;) states that, for all a, b, and function f:</p>
<p>   a = b  =>  f.a = f.b     .</p>
<p>Hence, you can see the first step as a mutual implication where, in one direction, function f is taking the square root, and in the other direction, function f corresponds to squaring.</p>
<p>Thanks for your comment!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-1206</link>
		<dc:creator>mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 22:05:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-1206</guid>
		<description>Hi. 

delicious!truly elegant!

isn't the first equivalence actually an implication? m/n could be minus sqrt(2)...

tks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi. </p>
<p>delicious!truly elegant!</p>
<p>isn&#8217;t the first equivalence actually an implication? m/n could be minus sqrt(2)&#8230;</p>
<p>tks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erik</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-739</link>
		<dc:creator>Erik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:14:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-739</guid>
		<description>Thanks, I thought I was going mad. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, I thought I was going mad. <img src='http://www.joaoff.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jff</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-737</link>
		<dc:creator>jff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:37:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-737</guid>
		<description>Dear Erik,

of course I have. It was a typo, I'm sorry. It is corrected now. Thanks a lot!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Erik,</p>
<p>of course I have. It was a typo, I&#8217;m sorry. It is corrected now. Thanks a lot!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erik</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-735</link>
		<dc:creator>Erik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:26:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-735</guid>
		<description>Did you keep that sqrt on a little longer than necessary, or am I completely misunderstanding this proof?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did you keep that sqrt on a little longer than necessary, or am I completely misunderstanding this proof?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jff</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-729</link>
		<dc:creator>jff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 09:47:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-729</guid>
		<description>Hmmm. I'm using a plugin called wp-latexrenderer. I have to investigate whether it works for comments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm. I&#8217;m using a plugin called wp-latexrenderer. I have to investigate whether it works for comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-727</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:23:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-727</guid>
		<description>nope</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nope</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://www.joaoff.com/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-726</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joaoferreira.org/2008/02/11/direct-proofs/#comment-726</guid>
		<description>by the way, comments on wordpress support the wordpress subset of LaTeX. But since there's no preview, if you goof, you have to ask the host to nicely fix things up.

Let's try:

$latex e^{i\pi}+1=0 $</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>by the way, comments on wordpress support the wordpress subset of LaTeX. But since there&#8217;s no preview, if you goof, you have to ask the host to nicely fix things up.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s try:</p>
<p>$latex e^{i\pi}+1=0 $</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
