Timeline for Nice examples of proofs by cases?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2014 at 1:57 | comment | added | vonbrand | Thanks, folks. I don't need the actual proofs, I'll have to look them up, check different alternatives and write them up for myself anyway. | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 18:34 | comment | added | JPBurke | I want to make it clear that my comment is not meant to say your answer is not valuable. And it may be exactly what vonbrand is looking for. I personally felt it was incomplete, and was an opportunity to make a point about math education and how we talk about problem types. Our (traditional) curriculum is very programmed in this way. I think it helps to be aware of it, even in situations like this. | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 18:31 | comment | added | JPBurke | Students often get the impression that a problem must be associated with a specific type of solution. This can interfere with problem solving as a practice, which either seeks not-previously-taught solutions to novel problems, or novel solutions to familiar problems. People may disagree with me on this, but I think it behooves us to be explicit that a proof is by case (or some other method) but that a statement or problem is not a proof by case example. Not only because the proof isn't there, but that we're talking about an approach, not a problem type. | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 18:22 | comment | added | ncr | I guess when I read "proof" I read it as statements that can be proved by cases. I can add a proof if the OP clarifies that he wants the actual proof (I know that's what @vonbrand said, but if he wants to come up with his own cases, I'll leave it without the proof for now). | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 17:44 | comment | added | JPBurke | Isn't the question asking for proofs? | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 17:26 | history | answered | ncr | CC BY-SA 3.0 |