Timeline for How Would an Intuitionist Prove This?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 2016 at 16:26 | comment | added | J126 | Thanks. I am learning a lot from these various answers. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 16:20 | history | edited | Andrej Bauer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 399 characters in body
|
| Sep 28, 2016 at 16:15 | comment | added | Andrej Bauer | Ah yes, that's much better! I'll put it in the answer. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 16:06 | comment | added | Carl Mummert | This is also the proof I thought of first. I realized after a comment that there is an even easier one. Given the natural number $n$ from the hypothesis, it either equals the natural number $b$ or does not. If it does, then $b = n$ divides $a$. If it does not, then $n > 1$ divides $b$, so $b$ is composite. This is a constructive proof because equality for naturals is decidable. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 13:47 | history | edited | Andrej Bauer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 76 characters in body
|
| Sep 28, 2016 at 13:40 | history | answered | Andrej Bauer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |