@amWhy @XanderHenderson @ZacharySelk @ccorn: This answer should be undeleted in my opinion. It solves the problem without using all kinds of unnecessary tools involving power series and termwise differentiation.
@user21820 It was deleted by the owner. What can be done about that?
(I suspect that someone with more XP than myself has more tools available, but as far as I can see, the only thing that I can do is flag it for moderator intervention.)
@XanderHenderson Interesting; it was undeleted by a couple of us a while ago, and then the author deleted it again. I can't understand why. But this is what we can do:
Another user pisco originally posted this, but kept deleting his/her answer. It however is completely elementary and hence in my opinion superior to using power series and termwise differentiation (which require non-trivial theorems):
$\dfrac{2^r}{5^{2^r}+1} = \dfrac{2^r}{5^{2^r}-1} - \dfrac{2^{...
@user21820 I made your display math look more gooder. I also think that you should not use \displaystyle inline for the sum, but that is even more minor pedantry. :)
@user21820 I think that I have dealt with everything on the sidebar to the best of my XP
@XanderHenderson Haha thanks. Personally I avoid $$ because I don't like mathematical formulae in the middle, since as a logician I care about logical structure, and it's impossible to retain proof structure when some mathematical expression interrupts every few lines. However, in this case there is nothing else to say but that formula, so it's perfect. =)
If I understand you correctly logicians have a different style guide? Good to know. For my own sake, I find centered, displayed math to help immensely with readability. $\ddot\smile$
@XanderHenderson Hmm I was speaking mostly for myself. I don't know if there's a statistical difference in style between logicians and other mathematicians. =)
@Shaun I don't quite agree. it's trivial to convert a reasonable proof of the desired theorem into a very formal one (say in the format here). The asker didn't show any effort in attempting that whatsoever.
@Shaun We get a hundred or more "questions" a day where someone "orders" what they want to do, expecting us to do the work for them. They assign problems for us to do for them. We can hardly keep up with plucking such questions out of activity. In this case, the OP states: I want to prove foo-fie, using foo-fie (statement of what foo-fie is) in FOL. This should not have been closed because the linked question and answer don't meet my demands. Please proceed to meet my demands!
Unfortunately Bram28 has become all to eager to oblige in answering such demands, and uses a computer program which writes the proof, then posts the resulting image (screen shot) as an answer.
@amWhy i am almost losing what your notion of a math.se appropriate question is. I agree with your assessment on many questions. However, if a question gets closed for being too simple, then consider that there are people that dislike if questions are too broad and with non-essential detail. Some people get put off by too much text just because it provides a hump that they are forced to parse before they are able to work on the problem.
I did not say it was "too simple". I said the OP hadn't done anything wrt the question, and essentially told us "I want foo", and expected someone to give them foo. I'm assuming you are referring to my second to last comment above?
I don't like folks treating users of this site as though we are drive-through-fast-food-servers.
@Peter Not that fast-food-workers should be treated rudely. The point is, this site has become, for too many, a "tell you what I want, and shortly later, pick up the fulfilled order.
it's either a fast food drive through or a communist food court or some utopia heaven where the you lie on the beach and the fruit grows right into your mouth. If people are fed the how is secondary.
Why don't you just ignore a question that you don't like the tone of?
May I remind you, @Peter, I never objected that the question is "too simple". I've seen good questions much simpler. In any case, I don't work fast-food, any more, and my days babysitting and spoon-feeding are over.
@PeterSheldrick Why don't you ignore the comments you don't like the tone of? Perhaps you're operating with a biased standard, yourself?
@PeterSheldrick So are you bearing some seething resentment about that which you have not been able to resolve. I cannot close a question on my own. Only a mod can do that. Four users must have agreed with me that the question (which is ?) was worth closure. That's unless it was an exact duplicate of a previous question in calc, logic, integration, discrete math ... in which I can close a post as a duplicate of a post tagged with a tag I have a gold badge in.
So either put aside your angst towards me about that one question, and address me as a colleague, or else ignore me and do not put words in my mouth, such as you did just now, claiming I claimed that the question is poor because it's too simple, and claiming that I am responsible for a somewhere in the past closed question of yours.
Please, @PeterSheldrick, in chat rooms, if you want to reply to someone, go to the comment you want to reply to, hover over the the left space immediately prior to the comment, see a down arrow, click on it, select "reply to this message". More simply, start your message with @<username> (using the specific user you want to address in place of "<username>"
