Curso de geometría métrica, Volume 1. Front Cover. Pedro Puig Adam. Nuevas Graficas, QR code for Curso de geometría métrica. Curso de geometría métrica, Volume 1. Front Cover. Pedro Puig Adam. Patronato de Publicaciones de la Escuela Especial de Ingenieros Industriales, Curso de Geometria metrica. Tomo I-Fundamentos, Tomo II-Complementos. P. Puig Adam. Published by Biblioteca matematica, Price: US$
|Published (Last):||12 October 2016|
|PDF File Size:||6.20 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||11.2 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Pedro Puig Adam
Home Questions Tags Users Unanswered. My question is, is it always necessary to then include a formal proof of the theorem after its statement, if I’ve already explained how I got mettica Reasonings, explanations and from time to time, theorems as conclussions. Sign up or log in Sign up using Google.
For example, a reader that is just looking for a proof of a gievn theorem, will prefer the Theorem – Proof style. Nevertheless, I think that this style has more cons than pros. I am aware that it is good practice to include formal proofs but if the proof is implied in my explanation leading up to the theorem, is it still necessary to include it formally?
This has prompted me to start using formal ‘lemma, theorem, proof’ formatting which I’ve never done before.
Pedro Puig Adam | LibraryThing
Sign up using Facebook. I’m writing up my solutions to a rather large set of number theory problems, and was wondering the following.
For this reason I’ve been writing in normal prose, describing my thinking, and arriving every now and then at a main lemma or theorem. Sign up using Email and Password. Should one always place the proof of a theorem after its statement?