[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in answer, link at end of answer (152): Convert back from BTC into a local currency, efficiently by Sabine Van Kerckhove on bitcoin.SE

Implies sure is one rule that hates parallel operations, cannot really think of dealing with it like parallel computing...

@Secret What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Please don't keep trying to talk about things that have nothing to do with mathematics... You can do that in your own room.

typo: not going to do it here

← 4 messages moved from mempool

← 4 messages moved from mempool

Rule number one: The more specialised people in a field is, the less tolerant and patient they are in trying to comprehend something that does not make sense to them at first glance

Rule number two: The more inter discipline the language in a sentence is, the harder it is to comprehend for most spcialists

Rule number three: The society generally lacks patience in trying to comprehend how you see the world, and are much more interested in conforming you to see the world in their way

Rule number four: Because of Rule number 3, whenever something rare and weird happened, people get attracted to it, be it an accident or something miraculous

Rule number five: My personality is opposite to the definition of logical rigor, and yet I am required to marry logic to achieve the goals of The Plan. The very success of this is a contradiction that the world will <<>>, and thus it is a weirdness that is worth pursing

Rule number (): 2020 is the year where everything big will happen, and we will try our best to overwrite every single rule that is meaningless of this reality. We DO NOT conform to what the society told us, it is time to liberate from these useless rules

Rule number 0: Focus on the learning first, ignore the rest

Rule number X: The first rule to erase from the source Code of this reality, is the ability for humanity to have the thought "We do not care what you think, we do not care how you see, just follow the rules, no questions"

We do not follow rules we do not understand

Rule number final: All of the above except Rule 0 is rambling nonsense, thus they do not mean anything lol

The rule to be erased as stated in Rule number X, is anything that convey the meaning of "You are different, you don't belong here, we never cared or loved you". Anyone who displayed this intention without a sufficiently necessary reason, should be [data expunged], for they are the greatest betrayal of the concept of trust

← 12 messages moved from :--O--:

                                             If k>n:
                                                      0 < 1 and Forall x in N(x>0 implies x>=1)
                                                      1>0
                                                      Forall x in N(x>0 implies x>=1)
                                                      Given k in N:
                                                             If k > n+1:
                                                                    Forall x,y,z in N(x<y implies x+z<y+z)

This is the induction fragment that allows me to prove k<n+1 => (k<n or k=n)

I think the step that took me the most time is "If k > n+1:"

and I think the hardest and less algorithmic step of many of these proofs is often to figure out what to put inside those "If"s and in what ordering

typo: There should be an If k<n+1: as the outermost context in this fragment to justify all those n+1<n+1 in the latter steps

@Secret Your induction does not give "Forall m in N (m>n+1).". Also, I can't read your attempt properly because you used k when it is already used. You need to use an unused variable name rather than k in "Given k in N:"

But it looks like it is coming together.

Please also prove only the sentence "forall k,n in N ( k<n+1 implies k<n or k=n )" instead of giving me a fragment with a crazy lot of indentation.