Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The validity of this method can be verified from the usual principle of mathematical induction. Using mathematical induction on the statement P(n) defined as "Q(m) is false for all natural numbers m less than or equal to n", it follows that P(n) holds for all n, which means that Q(n) is false for every natural number n.
The induction, bounding and least number principles are commonly used in reverse mathematics and second-order arithmetic. For example, I Σ 1 {\displaystyle {\mathsf {I}}\Sigma _{1}} is part of the definition of the subsystem R C A 0 {\displaystyle {\mathsf {RCA}}_{0}} of second-order arithmetic.
By the principle of mathematical induction it follows that the result is true for all natural numbers. Now, S(0) is clearly true since cos(0x) + i sin(0x) = 1 + 0i = 1. Finally, for the negative integer cases, we consider an exponent of −n for natural n.
In the same treatise, Pascal gave an explicit statement of the principle of mathematical induction. [24] In 1654, he proved Pascal's identity relating the sums of the p-th powers of the first n positive integers for p = 0, 1, 2, ..., k. [26] That same year, Pascal had a religious experience, and mostly gave up work in mathematics.
Transfinite induction requires proving a base case (used for 0), a successor case (used for those ordinals which have a predecessor), and a limit case (used for ordinals which don't have a predecessor). Transfinite induction is an extension of mathematical induction to well-ordered sets, for example to sets of ordinal numbers or cardinal numbers.
The ninth, final, axiom is a second-order statement of the principle of mathematical induction over the natural numbers, which makes this formulation close to second-order arithmetic. A weaker first-order system is obtained by explicitly adding the addition and multiplication operation symbols and replacing the second-order induction axiom with ...
Most recursive definitions have two foundations: a base case (basis) and an inductive clause. The difference between a circular definition and a recursive definition is that a recursive definition must always have base cases, cases that satisfy the definition without being defined in terms of the definition itself, and that all other instances in the inductive clauses must be "smaller" in some ...
Structural induction is a proof method that is used in mathematical logic (e.g., in the proof of Łoś' theorem), computer science, graph theory, and some other mathematical fields. It is a generalization of mathematical induction over natural numbers and can be further generalized to arbitrary Noetherian induction .