Timeline for Is there always one integer between these two rational numbers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2018 at 7:04 | history | edited | Gottfried Helms | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 196 characters in body
|
| Sep 13, 2017 at 22:27 | history | edited | Fred Daniel Kline | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
changed k>2 to k>=2
|
| Sep 9, 2017 at 18:18 | comment | added | Yaakov Baruch | @FredKline, it seems that now we all agree on what is actually posted so far being a reformulation. Possibly a proof of the conjecture is on the way, or perhaps an empirical proof. I wish you a full and speedy recovery. | |
| Sep 9, 2017 at 11:22 | history | edited | Gottfried Helms | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
improved latex
|
| Sep 9, 2017 at 3:29 | comment | added | Gottfried Helms | @Fred, since you mentioned to have current difficulties to formulate a narrative I've taken the liberty to edit your text (a bit radical, perhaps) hoping I do not completely change its meaning. It might not be correct because I do not arrive at a proof but only at a conjecture. Please expand further - or roll back if I did too much/did wrong interpretation. Hope all the best with you! | |
| Sep 9, 2017 at 3:26 | history | edited | Gottfried Helms | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
tried to make your text better understandable, rollback if nonsense
|
| Sep 8, 2017 at 8:30 | comment | added | Yaakov Baruch | The language is odd (eg. does "started with" mean "assumed"? "verified" means "proved existence in ${\mathbb N}$ of"?). It seems as if you assume (by using the word "when") the equality in the second line to prove the existence of $c$ with the properties in OP, but where is that assumption proven? I would recommend a complete rewrite using more standard language ("assume", "implies", "exists") and no logic symbols. | |
| Sep 7, 2017 at 16:01 | comment | added | Yaakov Baruch | I still don't get it. Ok, if $c$ as in OP exists then it has to be equal to what you say, but I don't see a clear logical sequence of implications that proves that such $c$ always exists... | |
| Sep 7, 2017 at 15:15 | comment | added | Yaakov Baruch | I'm lost. What is assumed and what is proven here? In particular in the penultimate line are you claiming that there is an integer $c$ such that the inequalities hold? How does that follow from the preceding lines? | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 23:32 | history | edited | Fred Daniel Kline | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
clarified meaning
|
| Sep 6, 2017 at 22:56 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | By "residue", you mean "fractional part"? By "givens", you mean ... what? | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 22:32 | history | answered | Fred Daniel Kline | CC BY-SA 3.0 |