Knowledge

:Reference desk/Archives/Mathematics/2008 May 21 - Knowledge

Source 📝

2148:
the limit of the ratio between (the number of times you throw the white dice and it shows four or five) and (the number of times you throw the white dice altogether). The conditional probability p(A|B) is the limit of the ratio between (the number of times that you throw both dice and the white dice show four or five and the blue dice show six) and (the number of times that you throw both dice and the blue dice show six). Now, if the two events are independent in the non-technical sense of the word, that the result of the two dice do not depend on one another, then the two limits must be equal. So p(A)=p(A|B) if A and B are independent. Now define that A and B are
2153:
times you throw both dice and the blue one shows six), multiplied by the limit of the ratio between (the number of times the blue dice shows six) and (the number of times you throw the blue dice all together). Using that the product of limits is the limit of the product, you get the limit of the ratio between (the number of times you throw both dice and the white one shows four or five and the blue one shows six) and (the number of times you throw the blue dice all together), which is equal to the right hand side p(A and B).
2147:
No empirical observations are needed, (nor are they possible because the probability is a limit which is not accesible observationally), but a thought experiment: Consider an event A, (say, that a white dice show four or five), and an event B, (say, that a blue dice show six). The probability p(A) is
1013:
This answer got me thinking about whether the Fundamental Theorem is actually necessary here. More precisely: firstly, does there exist an integral domain in which any pair of elements has a GCD and an LCM, but which is not a UFD? (edit:yes) Secondly, if there are such rings, does this result hold in
2274:
On a certain bike there are spokes that are 14 inches long. Each spoke forms an angle of 30 with each of the two spokes beside it. What is the distance between the places where two spokes that are beside each other attach to the wheel? I think this has something to do with geometric mean, but I'm
2236:
Yes, the 'probability of an outcome of an experiment', based on some hypothesis, is a frequentist probability. The Bayesian point of view is the opposite one, to estimate the credibility of a hypothesis, based on given outcomes of experiments. While the two interpretations of probability differ, the
871:
Ahaha. Well, that I can live with (although I do often rail against the mathematical tradition of naming things after people instead of descriptively). But Lang is always doing things like assuming "normed instead of metric" so that "we can write the distance in terms of the absolute value sign",
1528:
Hi. First off, no you can't say mutually exclusive events are a special case of independent events, as by definition the two are not independent - if you have one, you cannot have the other. The proof of independence I admit I can't remember right now, but it is fairly logical when you think about
2152:
if p(A)=p(A|B). So independent events are also statistically independent. Consider the equation p(A|B)·p(B)=p(A and B). The left hand side is the limit of the ratio between (the number of times you throw both dice and the white one shows four or five and the blue one shows six) and (the number of
1429:
I think that's what you'd already worked out. It is, indeed, curious that every pair having a GCD implies every pair has an LCM, but a given pair having a GCD doesn't imply that that same pair has a LCM. (The book I found was very large, very old and very much falling apart, so I left it in the
881:
The problem with descriptive naming is that disambiguation can make things pretty unwieldy. My own preference is a combination: thus Hahn-Banach extension theorem, Tietze-Urysohn extension theorem, Carathéodory's extension theorem, etc. On the subject of weak hypotheses in exercises, this often
2320:
Hmm, I wonder why that tripped me up so badly. Is there any way to do this with triangles and trig? This was on a trig test so I have no idea why there would be something about circles on it. I like Mattbuck's method though. That's a lot simpler than what I was trying. Thanks,
1617:, so there is nothing to prove. You may ask, why did we choose to call "independent" two events satisfying this. I think this boils down to the empirical observation that real-world events which seem independent to us tend to satisfy this rule. You can rephrase this in terms of 2180:
But again, you just move the problem a little further along. In order to justify that two dice will be independent of each other, you first assume that successive tosses of a single die will be independent, with that assumption and its definition swept under the carpet.
1424:
I was unable to find any books which mentioned GCD domains, I did however find one that briefly mentioned a "ring with a greatest common divisor" - it seems the name is far from standard. The only relevant thing it mentioned about them was a theorem:
1502:
my doubt is that ...how can we represent two indepentent events on a venn diagram.if we do it by two intersecting circle .then what can we say about the condition of independence.p(A intersection B)=p(A)*p(B).how is this derived.
1860:
Which, as Meni said, just move the problem to the definition of conditional probability. Sooner or later you just have to accept that those definitions seem to work - you can't prove everything, you have to start somewhere.
1217:
That we're in a GCD domain is only assuming the existence of GCDs, not LCMs, as far as I can tell, so you need a slightly stronger assumption than just being in a GCD domain. (It may turn out to be equivalent, of course.)
872:
or adding hypotheses because "this is the only case anyone cares about anyway." I suspect this is just another combination of his perverse sense of humour and love of dropping stealth exercises for the reader.
573: 275: 1529:
it. If you have two events, neither of which influences the other, the probability of them both happening would be the probability of one happening multiplied by the probability of the other happening. -
749: 499: 2129: 2197:
The very concept of the probability of an outcome of an experiment assumes that the experiment can be repeated indefinitely and that the outcome of the repetitions are mutually independent.
2051: 1750: 66: 45: 1815: 51: 327: 211: 59: 55: 1615: 1457:
The book I was reading could easily have pre-dated 1974. Odd that none of the other books I looked at mentioned that name, though - maybe Durham Uni library is very out-of-date! --
2335:
Mattbuck's answer gives the distance along the wheel, i.e. along an arc of a circle. If you want the straight-line distance, then trigonometry is the way to go, specifically the
389: 358: 608: 435: 156: 1970: 2413:
Oh, I understand what's going on now. I just completely misunderstood the problem. Otherwise, I would've hadn't any trouble solving it. Thank you all for your help,
642: 681: 25: 85:
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the
2351:
Wait, crap. I feel stupid now. I misunderstood the problem and took it that the spokes didn't touch at any point. Well, that was a stupid mistake.
2220:
is a little different. I don't think that's an issue for this discussion, where such frequencies are meaningful, but it's always good to be precise. --
1388:
My algebra's been slow lately, but finding a piece of paper has finally allowed me to prove that any GCD domain has (binary) LCMs. Unfortunately,
957:
Yeah. For LCTVSs you can prove the continuous-extension version of HB from the most basic version via messing around with Minkowski functionals.
1232:
Sorry, by we I mean me, in my initial question above. Our article doesn't state whether a GCD domain automatically has LCMs, and it should.
37: 1392:
is completely unreferenced and my algebra textbook doesn't mention the things explicitly; time to go looking for a reference that does.
507: 2298:. You then use the formula for the circumference (c = 2(pi)r), but you only want 30 degrees rather than 360, so multiply by 30/360. - 1448:'s textbook in 1974, so it may now be standard. Other terms mentioned are 'pseudo-Bezout', 'HCF-ring', 'complete' and 'property BA'. 1415:
Google books gave me a ref, which I've added. Curiously, in any ID, ({x,y} has an LCM) → ({x,y} has a GCD), but the converse fails.
996: 21: 228: 686: 2349:
Hmm, how would you pull that off? I tried that on the test, but I couldn't figure out how to make it work. Please explain.
1499:
hey ive got fundamental dobts...kindly some one give me a link or the required answers clearly... i wd b highly greatful ..
2422: 2392: 2360: 2343: 2330: 2311: 2288: 2258: 2229: 2206: 2190: 2162: 2140: 1906: 1870: 1854: 1630: 1542: 1521: 1466: 1452: 1439: 1419: 1410: 1396: 1383: 1236: 1227: 1212: 1203: 1179: 1018: 1008: 989: 961: 952: 927: 890: 876: 846: 806: 781: 768: 755: 651: 1897:), rather than p(A intersection B)=p(A)*p(B) as the definition of independence. You don't just have to accept anything. 440: 2056: 1323:) and vice versa - as per my argument above (with a little tightening up to allow for associates). And if further 2388: 1983: 1682: 2136: 1626: 1552: 1511: 827: 86: 17: 1755: 1618: 830: 280: 164: 2384: 2186: 999:), and then work out what the lcm and gcd are in terms of those primes, and it should follow from that. -- 833: 657:
Well, it works, though the use of the basis B is completely unnecessary. You could just end by saying 'if
1507: 2213: 1558: 985: 2182: 1427:
An integral domain with a greatest common divisor is one with a least common multiple, and conversely.
2340: 2217: 1517: 1449: 1416: 1393: 1233: 1209: 1200: 1015: 958: 887: 843: 818: 815: 778: 752: 367: 336: 1679:
occured or not. This definition seems intuitively natural. As the conditional probability satisfies
2254: 2245: 2239: 2202: 2158: 2132: 1902: 1850: 1622: 1379: 1175: 981: 824: 330: 798:
Oh, that's interesting. The name of the theorem confuses me at times. I should know by now that
581: 402: 2306: 1537: 126: 1923: 2418: 2380: 2356: 2326: 2284: 1445: 1272: 613: 660: 2225: 1866: 1462: 1435: 1406: 1223: 1004: 2237:
algebra is the same. Computing the probability of the outcome based on the hypothesis is
1208:
And of course we're assuming the existence of LCMs, so any minimal CM is an LCM. Thanks.
2336: 2250: 2198: 2154: 1898: 1846: 1375: 1171: 836: 2300: 1531: 839: 821: 812: 2243:. Computing the credibility of the hypothesis based on the observations is called 980:( where lcm stands for least common multiple and gcd for greatest common divisor ) 116:
a finite-dimensional subspace. The claim is that there exists a closed subspace
2414: 2352: 2322: 2280: 1401:
I'm off to the Uni library in a bit anyway - I'll see if I can find anything. --
2277:
This is in fact not a homework. It was a bonus question on a test we had today
2221: 1862: 1506:
can we say mutually exclusive events as a special case of independent events.
1458: 1431: 1402: 1389: 1371: 1332: 1219: 1032: 1000: 924: 883: 873: 803: 799: 765: 648: 2131:? And, why would you define the latter without empirically observing it? -- 977:
product of two natural numbers is equal to the product of their lcm and gcd
949: 1370:
I am sure this must be in a standard text somewhere - I will add it to the
74: 882:
serves the purpose of making the reader think more. In some cases (the
2295: 948:
To the best of my memory, it is also true for locally convex spaces.
1170:(and vice versa, by reversing the above), even if it is not unique. 568:{\displaystyle \beta -\sum _{i}\varepsilon _{i}(\beta )e_{i}\in G,} 1972:" (I could quibble about what happens when the probabilities of 995:
I would start by expressing a and b as products of primes (see
2294:
Assuming they come from the same point, you can treat them as
270:{\displaystyle \{\varepsilon _{1},\ldots ,\varepsilon _{n}\}} 974:
could please give me the proof for the following equality
79:
Welcome to the Knowledge Mathematics Reference Desk Archives
1635:
The definition of statistical independence can be written
1185:
I suspect you might be right, but your proof doesn't work.
1980:
are zero, but never mind that). But how do you know that
1829:, illustrating that the area of the intersection between 1444:
According to my source, 'GCD domain' was popularised by
886:
springs to mind), the minimal hypotheses are the proof.
744:{\displaystyle v-\sum _{i}\varepsilon _{i}(v)e_{i}\in G} 2059: 1986: 1926: 1758: 1685: 1561: 689: 663: 616: 584: 510: 443: 405: 370: 339: 283: 231: 167: 129: 1621:, but that's just moving the problem elsewhere. -- 494:{\displaystyle \beta \in B-\{e_{1},\ldots ,e_{n}\}} 2123: 2045: 1964: 1809: 1744: 1609: 743: 675: 636: 602: 567: 493: 429: 383: 352: 321: 269: 205: 150: 2124:{\displaystyle p(A|B)={\frac {P(A\cap B)}{P(B)}}} 2053:, unless you observe that empirically or define 1663:is the same as the unconditional probability of 1655:), meaning that the conditional probability of 1014:them, i.e. is ab always an associate of (a,b)? 1430:library, so don't ask any more questions!) -- 360:extends to a continuous linear functional on 8: 488: 456: 424: 418: 316: 284: 264: 232: 200: 168: 2046:{\displaystyle p(A|B)\cdot p(B)=p(A\cap B)} 1745:{\displaystyle p(A|B)\cdot p(B)=p(A\cap B)} 1339:is not just a maximal c.d. but is a GCD of 104:Complements of finite-dimensional subspaces 2275:not sure and have no idea how to do it. * 364:. The intersection of the kernels of the 2083: 2069: 2058: 1996: 1985: 1936: 1925: 1810:{\displaystyle p(A\cap B)=p(A)\cdot p(B)} 1757: 1695: 1684: 1560: 729: 710: 700: 688: 662: 615: 583: 550: 531: 521: 509: 482: 463: 442: 404: 375: 369: 344: 338: 310: 291: 282: 258: 239: 230: 194: 175: 166: 128: 1154:, which contradicts our assumption that 1031:In case you didn't already find it, see 49: 36: 1374:article when I have found a reference. 777:is complete was unused. Dispose of it. 632: 322:{\displaystyle \{e_{1},\ldots ,e_{n}\}} 206:{\displaystyle \{e_{1},\ldots ,e_{n}\}} 65: 1817:is derived. In a unit square diagram, 1319:that are also c.m.s are associates of 1291:that are also c.d.s are associates of 1195:common multiple, but not that it is a 802:is cavalier with his hypotheses.  ;) 43: 1821:may be drawn as a horizontal bar and 1263:Aren't we going in circles here ? If 7: 1610:{\displaystyle p(A\cap B)=p(A)p(B)} 1078:must be a LCM because if we had a 32: 997:Fundamental theorem of arithmetic 1307:is a minimal common multiple of 923:Right. Stealth exercises.  ;) 811:Unfortunately, doing functional 384:{\displaystyle \varepsilon _{i}} 353:{\displaystyle \varepsilon _{i}} 1837:is the product of the areas of 1279:is a maximal common divisor of 1038:Seems to me that once you have 2115: 2109: 2101: 2089: 2077: 2070: 2063: 2040: 2028: 2019: 2013: 2004: 1997: 1990: 1959: 1953: 1944: 1937: 1930: 1804: 1798: 1789: 1783: 1774: 1762: 1739: 1727: 1718: 1712: 1703: 1696: 1689: 1604: 1598: 1592: 1586: 1577: 1565: 1082:that was a common multiple of 1054:(not necessarily unique) then 722: 716: 543: 537: 1: 1074:so is a common multiple. And 647:Is this the right approach? 603:{\displaystyle \beta \in F+G} 430:{\displaystyle F\cap G=\{0\}} 33: 1287:(i.e. the only multiples of 773:Oh, and the assumption that 151:{\displaystyle E=F\oplus G.} 2212:As I understand it, that's 1965:{\displaystyle P(A|B)=P(A)} 1825:as a vertical bar crossing 1315:(i.e. the only divisors of 1150:) that is also multiple of 217:and extend this to a basis 2447: 2270:Odd trig/geometry question 1912:Of course you can define " 1158:is a GCD. So for each GCD 391:is then a closed subspace 2150:statistically independent 2423:13:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2393:03:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2361:01:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2344:00:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2331:23:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2312:23:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2289:23:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2259:06:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC) 2230:19:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2207:18:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2191:15:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2163:14:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2141:11:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1907:08:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1871:20:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 1855:19:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 1667:. So the probability of 1631:17:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 1543:17:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 1522:15:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 1467:15:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1453:15:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1440:14:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1420:14:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1411:13:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1397:13:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1384:13:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1237:12:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1228:12:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 1213:21:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 1204:21:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 1180:16:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 1019:15:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 1009:14:32, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 990:14:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 962:21:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 953:11:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 928:14:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 891:13:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 877:13:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 847:13:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 807:12:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 782:12:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 769:11:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 756:10:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 652:08:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 18:Knowledge:Reference desk 1619:Conditional probability 1110:) is common divisor of 1090:and also a divisor of 970:proof for a.b=lcm x gcd 637:{\displaystyle F+G=E\,} 2125: 2047: 1966: 1811: 1746: 1611: 764:Good point. Thanks! 745: 677: 676:{\displaystyle v\in E} 638: 604: 569: 495: 431: 385: 354: 323: 271: 207: 152: 112:be a Banach space and 87:current reference desk 2214:frequency probability 2126: 2048: 1967: 1812: 1747: 1612: 746: 678: 639: 605: 570: 496: 432: 386: 355: 324: 277:be the basis dual to 272: 208: 153: 2218:Bayesian probability 2057: 1984: 1924: 1756: 1683: 1559: 687: 661: 614: 582: 508: 441: 403: 368: 337: 281: 229: 165: 127: 2246:inductive reasoning 2240:deductive reasoning 1920:are independent if 610:. It follows that 331:Hahn-Banach theorem 2121: 2043: 1962: 1807: 1742: 1607: 1187:You've shown that 741: 705: 673: 634: 633: 600: 565: 526: 491: 427: 381: 350: 319: 267: 203: 148: 2310: 2278: 2119: 1541: 1524: 1367:, and vice versa. 1271:are in a general 1199:common multiple. 1066:is a multiple of 696: 517: 93: 92: 73: 72: 2438: 2381:chord (geometry) 2304: 2276: 2130: 2128: 2127: 2122: 2120: 2118: 2104: 2084: 2073: 2052: 2050: 2049: 2044: 2000: 1971: 1969: 1968: 1963: 1940: 1877:It is ok to use 1816: 1814: 1813: 1808: 1752:, the condition 1751: 1749: 1748: 1743: 1699: 1616: 1614: 1613: 1608: 1535: 1515: 1446:Irving Kaplansky 1273:commutative ring 750: 748: 747: 742: 734: 733: 715: 714: 704: 682: 680: 679: 674: 643: 641: 640: 635: 609: 607: 606: 601: 574: 572: 571: 566: 555: 554: 536: 535: 525: 500: 498: 497: 492: 487: 486: 468: 467: 436: 434: 433: 428: 390: 388: 387: 382: 380: 379: 359: 357: 356: 351: 349: 348: 328: 326: 325: 320: 315: 314: 296: 295: 276: 274: 273: 268: 263: 262: 244: 243: 212: 210: 209: 204: 199: 198: 180: 179: 157: 155: 154: 149: 75: 38:Mathematics desk 34: 2446: 2445: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2437: 2436: 2435: 2385:Prestidigitator 2379:Also check out 2272: 2105: 2085: 2055: 2054: 1982: 1981: 1922: 1921: 1754: 1753: 1681: 1680: 1557: 1556: 1497: 1162:there is a LCM 972: 725: 706: 685: 684: 659: 658: 612: 611: 580: 579: 546: 527: 506: 505: 478: 459: 439: 438: 401: 400: 371: 366: 365: 340: 335: 334: 306: 287: 279: 278: 254: 235: 227: 226: 213:be a basis for 190: 171: 163: 162: 125: 124: 106: 101: 30: 29: 28: 12: 11: 5: 2444: 2442: 2434: 2433: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2402: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2337:law of cosines 2315: 2314: 2271: 2268: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2234: 2233: 2232: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2145: 2144: 2143: 2133:Meni Rosenfeld 2117: 2114: 2111: 2108: 2103: 2100: 2097: 2094: 2091: 2088: 2082: 2079: 2076: 2072: 2068: 2065: 2062: 2042: 2039: 2036: 2033: 2030: 2027: 2024: 2021: 2018: 2015: 2012: 2009: 2006: 2003: 1999: 1995: 1992: 1989: 1961: 1958: 1955: 1952: 1949: 1946: 1943: 1939: 1935: 1932: 1929: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1806: 1803: 1800: 1797: 1794: 1791: 1788: 1785: 1782: 1779: 1776: 1773: 1770: 1767: 1764: 1761: 1741: 1738: 1735: 1732: 1729: 1726: 1723: 1720: 1717: 1714: 1711: 1708: 1705: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1691: 1688: 1623:Meni Rosenfeld 1606: 1603: 1600: 1597: 1594: 1591: 1588: 1585: 1582: 1579: 1576: 1573: 1570: 1567: 1564: 1508:Reveal.mystery 1496: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1484: 1483: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1476: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1470: 1469: 1368: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1206: 1036: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 971: 968: 967: 966: 965: 964: 945: 944: 943: 942: 941: 940: 939: 938: 937: 936: 935: 934: 933: 932: 931: 930: 906: 905: 904: 903: 902: 901: 900: 899: 898: 897: 896: 895: 894: 893: 858: 857: 856: 855: 854: 853: 852: 851: 850: 849: 819:distinguishing 789: 788: 787: 786: 785: 784: 759: 758: 740: 737: 732: 728: 724: 721: 718: 713: 709: 703: 699: 695: 692: 672: 669: 666: 631: 628: 625: 622: 619: 599: 596: 593: 590: 587: 576: 575: 564: 561: 558: 553: 549: 545: 542: 539: 534: 530: 524: 520: 516: 513: 490: 485: 481: 477: 474: 471: 466: 462: 458: 455: 452: 449: 446: 426: 423: 420: 417: 414: 411: 408: 399:, and clearly 378: 374: 347: 343: 318: 313: 309: 305: 302: 299: 294: 290: 286: 266: 261: 257: 253: 250: 247: 242: 238: 234: 202: 197: 193: 189: 186: 183: 178: 174: 170: 159: 158: 147: 144: 141: 138: 135: 132: 105: 102: 100: 97: 95: 91: 90: 82: 81: 71: 70: 64: 48: 41: 40: 31: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2443: 2424: 2420: 2416: 2412: 2411: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2407: 2406: 2405: 2404: 2403: 2394: 2390: 2386: 2382: 2378: 2377: 2376: 2375: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2371: 2362: 2358: 2354: 2350: 2347: 2346: 2345: 2342: 2338: 2334: 2333: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2319: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2313: 2308: 2303: 2302: 2297: 2293: 2292: 2291: 2290: 2286: 2282: 2269: 2260: 2256: 2252: 2248: 2247: 2242: 2241: 2235: 2231: 2227: 2223: 2219: 2215: 2211: 2210: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2196: 2192: 2188: 2184: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2173: 2172: 2164: 2160: 2156: 2151: 2146: 2142: 2138: 2134: 2112: 2106: 2098: 2095: 2092: 2086: 2080: 2074: 2066: 2060: 2037: 2034: 2031: 2025: 2022: 2016: 2010: 2007: 2001: 1993: 1987: 1979: 1975: 1956: 1950: 1947: 1941: 1933: 1927: 1919: 1915: 1911: 1910: 1908: 1904: 1900: 1896: 1892: 1888: 1884: 1880: 1876: 1872: 1868: 1864: 1859: 1858: 1856: 1852: 1848: 1844: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1824: 1820: 1801: 1795: 1792: 1786: 1780: 1777: 1771: 1768: 1765: 1759: 1736: 1733: 1730: 1724: 1721: 1715: 1709: 1706: 1700: 1692: 1686: 1678: 1674: 1670: 1666: 1662: 1658: 1654: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1601: 1595: 1589: 1583: 1580: 1574: 1571: 1568: 1562: 1554: 1550: 1546: 1545: 1544: 1539: 1534: 1533: 1527: 1526: 1525: 1523: 1520:was added at 1519: 1513: 1509: 1504: 1500: 1494: 1468: 1464: 1460: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1451: 1447: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1437: 1433: 1428: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1418: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1408: 1404: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1395: 1391: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1381: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1366: 1362: 1358: 1354: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1334: 1330: 1326: 1322: 1318: 1314: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1298: 1294: 1290: 1286: 1282: 1278: 1274: 1270: 1266: 1262: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1238: 1235: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1225: 1221: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1211: 1207: 1205: 1202: 1198: 1194: 1190: 1186: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1177: 1173: 1169: 1165: 1161: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1133: 1129: 1125: 1121: 1117: 1113: 1109: 1105: 1101: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1077: 1073: 1069: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1037: 1034: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1020: 1017: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1006: 1002: 998: 994: 993: 992: 991: 987: 983: 978: 975: 969: 963: 960: 956: 955: 954: 951: 947: 946: 929: 926: 922: 921: 920: 919: 918: 917: 916: 915: 914: 913: 912: 911: 910: 909: 908: 907: 892: 889: 885: 880: 879: 878: 875: 870: 869: 868: 867: 866: 865: 864: 863: 862: 861: 860: 859: 848: 845: 841: 840:Stefan Banach 838: 835: 832: 829: 826: 823: 820: 817: 814: 810: 809: 808: 805: 801: 797: 796: 795: 794: 793: 792: 791: 790: 783: 780: 776: 772: 771: 770: 767: 763: 762: 761: 760: 757: 754: 738: 735: 730: 726: 719: 711: 707: 701: 697: 693: 690: 670: 667: 664: 656: 655: 654: 653: 650: 645: 629: 626: 623: 620: 617: 597: 594: 591: 588: 585: 562: 559: 556: 551: 547: 540: 532: 528: 522: 518: 514: 511: 504: 503: 502: 483: 479: 475: 472: 469: 464: 460: 453: 450: 447: 444: 421: 415: 412: 409: 406: 398: 394: 376: 372: 363: 345: 341: 332: 311: 307: 303: 300: 297: 292: 288: 259: 255: 251: 248: 245: 240: 236: 224: 220: 216: 195: 191: 187: 184: 181: 176: 172: 145: 142: 139: 136: 133: 130: 123: 122: 121: 119: 115: 111: 103: 98: 96: 88: 84: 83: 80: 77: 76: 68: 61: 57: 53: 47: 42: 39: 35: 27: 23: 19: 2348: 2299: 2273: 2244: 2238: 2183:Black Carrot 2149: 1977: 1973: 1917: 1913: 1894: 1890: 1886: 1882: 1878: 1842: 1838: 1834: 1830: 1826: 1822: 1818: 1676: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1660: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1636: 1553:independence 1548: 1530: 1505: 1501: 1498: 1495:set theories 1426: 1364: 1360: 1359:is a LCM of 1356: 1352: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1336: 1328: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1300: 1296: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1280: 1276: 1268: 1264: 1196: 1192: 1188: 1184: 1167: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1139: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1123: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1107: 1103: 1099: 1095: 1091: 1087: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1067: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1051: 1047: 1043: 1039: 979: 976: 973: 774: 646: 577: 396: 392: 361: 222: 218: 214: 160: 117: 113: 109: 107: 94: 78: 1675:on whether 1673:independent 1516:—Preceding 26:Mathematics 2341:Algebraist 1549:definition 1450:Algebraist 1417:Algebraist 1394:Algebraist 1390:GCD domain 1372:GCD domain 1333:GCD domain 1234:Algebraist 1210:Algebraist 1201:Algebraist 1033:GCD domain 1016:Algebraist 959:Algebraist 888:Algebraist 884:five lemma 844:Algebraist 779:Algebraist 753:Algebraist 437:. And if 329:. By the 120:such that 2251:Bo Jacoby 2199:Bo Jacoby 2155:Bo Jacoby 1899:Bo Jacoby 1847:Bo Jacoby 1376:Gandalf61 1331:are in a 1172:Gandalf61 1118:(because 50:<< 2301:mattbuck 1532:mattbuck 1335:so that 982:Kasiraoj 816:requires 813:analysis 578:so that 24:‎ | 22:Archives 20:‎ | 1518:comment 1295:) then 1193:minimal 1070:and of 925:— merge 874:— merge 804:— merge 766:— merge 649:— merge 333:, each 225:. Let 89:pages. 2415:Zrs 12 2353:Zrs 12 2323:Zrs 12 2281:Zrs 12 1659:given 831:things 99:May 21 67:May 22 46:May 20 2383:. -- 2296:radii 2222:Tango 1863:Tango 1459:Tango 1432:Tango 1403:Tango 1347:then 1220:Tango 1197:least 1191:is a 1094:then 1001:Tango 837:after 834:named 683:then 501:then 69:: --> 63:: --> 62:: --> 44:< 16:< 2419:talk 2389:talk 2357:talk 2327:talk 2307:Talk 2285:talk 2255:talk 2226:talk 2203:talk 2187:talk 2159:talk 2137:talk 1916:and 1903:talk 1889:) = 1867:talk 1851:talk 1841:and 1833:and 1647:) = 1627:talk 1547:The 1538:Talk 1512:talk 1463:talk 1436:talk 1407:talk 1380:talk 1363:and 1343:and 1327:and 1311:and 1283:and 1275:and 1267:and 1224:talk 1176:talk 1134:and 1114:and 1086:and 1050:and 1042:GCD 1005:talk 986:talk 950:twma 800:Lang 221:for 161:Let 108:Let 1976:or 1671:is 1555:is 1551:of 1514:) 1046:of 825:lot 751:.' 395:of 60:Jun 56:May 52:Apr 2421:) 2391:) 2359:) 2339:. 2329:) 2287:) 2279:* 2257:) 2249:. 2228:) 2216:, 2209:. 2205:) 2189:) 2161:) 2139:) 2096:∩ 2035:∩ 2008:⋅ 1909:. 1905:) 1869:) 1861:-- 1857:. 1853:) 1845:. 1793:⋅ 1769:∩ 1734:∩ 1707:⋅ 1629:) 1572:∩ 1465:) 1438:) 1409:) 1382:) 1353:xy 1301:xy 1226:) 1218:-- 1178:) 1164:xy 1142:= 1126:= 1060:xy 1007:) 988:) 842:. 828:of 736:∈ 708:ε 698:∑ 694:− 668:∈ 644:. 589:∈ 586:β 557:∈ 541:β 529:ε 519:∑ 515:− 512:β 473:… 454:− 448:∈ 445:β 410:∩ 373:ε 342:ε 301:… 256:ε 249:… 237:ε 185:… 140:⊕ 58:| 54:| 2417:( 2387:( 2355:( 2325:( 2309:) 2305:( 2283:( 2261:. 2253:( 2224:( 2201:( 2185:( 2165:. 2157:( 2135:( 2116:) 2113:B 2110:( 2107:P 2102:) 2099:B 2093:A 2090:( 2087:P 2081:= 2078:) 2075:B 2071:| 2067:A 2064:( 2061:p 2041:) 2038:B 2032:A 2029:( 2026:p 2023:= 2020:) 2017:B 2014:( 2011:p 2005:) 2002:B 1998:| 1994:A 1991:( 1988:p 1978:B 1974:A 1960:) 1957:A 1954:( 1951:P 1948:= 1945:) 1942:B 1938:| 1934:A 1931:( 1928:P 1918:B 1914:A 1901:( 1895:A 1893:( 1891:p 1887:B 1885:| 1883:A 1881:( 1879:p 1865:( 1849:( 1843:B 1839:A 1835:B 1831:A 1827:A 1823:B 1819:A 1805:) 1802:B 1799:( 1796:p 1790:) 1787:A 1784:( 1781:p 1778:= 1775:) 1772:B 1766:A 1763:( 1760:p 1740:) 1737:B 1731:A 1728:( 1725:p 1722:= 1719:) 1716:B 1713:( 1710:p 1704:) 1701:B 1697:| 1693:A 1690:( 1687:p 1677:B 1669:A 1665:A 1661:B 1657:A 1653:A 1651:( 1649:p 1645:B 1643:| 1641:A 1639:( 1637:p 1625:( 1605:) 1602:B 1599:( 1596:p 1593:) 1590:A 1587:( 1584:p 1581:= 1578:) 1575:B 1569:A 1566:( 1563:p 1540:) 1536:( 1510:( 1461:( 1434:( 1405:( 1378:( 1365:y 1361:x 1357:w 1355:/ 1351:= 1349:z 1345:y 1341:x 1337:w 1329:y 1325:x 1321:z 1317:z 1313:y 1309:x 1305:w 1303:/ 1299:= 1297:z 1293:w 1289:w 1285:y 1281:x 1277:w 1269:y 1265:x 1222:( 1189:z 1174:( 1168:w 1166:/ 1160:w 1156:w 1152:w 1148:x 1146:/ 1144:u 1140:v 1138:/ 1136:y 1132:y 1130:/ 1128:u 1124:v 1122:/ 1120:x 1116:y 1112:x 1108:u 1106:/ 1104:z 1102:( 1100:w 1098:= 1096:v 1092:z 1088:y 1084:x 1080:u 1076:z 1072:y 1068:x 1064:w 1062:/ 1058:= 1056:z 1052:y 1048:x 1044:w 1040:a 1035:. 1003:( 984:( 822:a 775:E 739:G 731:i 727:e 723:) 720:v 717:( 712:i 702:i 691:v 671:E 665:v 630:E 627:= 624:G 621:+ 618:F 598:G 595:+ 592:F 563:, 560:G 552:i 548:e 544:) 538:( 533:i 523:i 489:} 484:n 480:e 476:, 470:, 465:1 461:e 457:{ 451:B 425:} 422:0 419:{ 416:= 413:G 407:F 397:E 393:G 377:i 362:E 346:i 317:} 312:n 308:e 304:, 298:, 293:1 289:e 285:{ 265:} 260:n 252:, 246:, 241:1 233:{ 223:E 219:B 215:F 201:} 196:n 192:e 188:, 182:, 177:1 173:e 169:{ 146:. 143:G 137:F 134:= 131:E 118:G 114:F 110:E

Index

Knowledge:Reference desk
Archives
Mathematics
Mathematics desk
May 20
Apr
May
Jun
May 22
current reference desk
Hahn-Banach theorem
 — merge
08:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Algebraist
10:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 — merge
11:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Algebraist
12:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Lang
 — merge
12:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
analysis
requires
distinguishing
a
lot
of
things
named

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.