/explore
|
You are here 
|
relatedwork.blogspot.com | ||
| | | | |
existentialtype.wordpress.com
|
|
| | | | | It is well-known that constructivists renounce "proof by contradiction", and that classicists scoff at the critique. "Those constructivists," the criticismgoes, "want to rule out proofs by contradiction. How absurd! Look, Pythagoras showed that the square root of two is irrational by deriving a contradiction from the assumption that it is rational. There is nothing wrong... | |
| | | | |
math.andrej.com
|
|
| | | | | [AI summary] A technical discussion distinguishing between proof by contradiction and proof of negation within the context of classical and intuitionistic logic. | |
| | | | |
adam.chlipala.net
|
|
| | | | | [AI summary] This text provides an in-depth exploration of advanced Coq proof techniques, focusing on manual proofs, recursion, and induction principles for complex data structures. It covers topics like nested inductive types, custom induction principles, and the design philosophy behind Coq's approach to proof automation. The text includes detailed examples of proof scripts, such as manual proofs for discrimination and injectivity of constructors, and discusses the use of tactics like discriminate and injection. It also touches on the implementation of functions like pred and the role of hints in improving proof readability and automation. | |
| | | | |
4gravitons.com
|
|
| | | Listen to a physicist talk about quantum mechanics, and you'll hear the word "observable". Observables are, intuitively enough, things that can be observed. They're properties that, in principle, one could measure in an experiment, like the position of a particle or its momentum. They're the kinds of things linked by uncertainty principles, where the better... | ||
