Timeline for Is there a common notation to indicate the final form of a simplified definition? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 27, 2020 at 1:59 | vote | accept | Seligmann | ||
| Mar 26, 2020 at 6:29 | history | closed |
YCor Henry Cohn Bugs Bunny Alexandre Eremenko Yemon Choi |
Not suitable for this site | |
| Mar 24, 2020 at 21:46 | comment | added | Lubin | I concur with @Carl-FredrikNybergBrodda: it would help to know just what you mean here. If you have a definition and then it gets simplified, perhaps in several steps to equivalent but shorter forms, then I would do this: Don’t give the definition first, but rather prove the lemma that the various descriptions of the phenomenon are equivalent, and then define: A (blah) that satisfies any one of the conditions of the above Lemma will be said to be (wudge). | |
| Mar 24, 2020 at 17:15 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 26, 2020 at 6:29 | |||||
| Mar 24, 2020 at 17:00 | answer | added | Carlo Beenakker | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 24, 2020 at 16:59 | comment | added | YCor | QED "quod erat demonstrandum", literally meaning "what was to be shown", doesn't fit, but I see no problem with the box sign. An alternative is (using 'theoremstyle" in latex) to use italics in the definition environment. I guess anyway that the most standard marking is the blank line, which is automatic after definition environment. | |
| Mar 24, 2020 at 16:59 | comment | added | Carl-Fredrik Nyberg Brodda | What do you mean by "simplified definition"? | |
| Mar 24, 2020 at 16:55 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 24, 2020 at 16:59 | |||||
| Mar 24, 2020 at 16:53 | history | asked | Seligmann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |