Difference between revisions of "Elementary proof"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(restore as before, because complex numbers are not simply ordered pairs; complex numbers do depend on a unique square root of -1)
 
(21 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
The term "elementary proof" or "elementary techniques" in mathematics means [[proof | proofs]] that use only [[real numbers]] or [[real analysis]] rather than the use of [[complex analysis]].<ref>http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ElementaryProof.html</ref> Elementary proofs cannot be broken down into smaller proofs of the same proposition.
+
An '''elementary proof''' or '''elementary technique''' in mathematics is a [[proof]] that uses only [[real numbers]] or [[real analysis]] rather than the use of [[complex analysis]]<ref>http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ElementaryProof.html</ref> or reliance on less rigorous axioms, such as the [[Axiom of Choice]].  An elementary proof typically cannot be improved by expressing it in simpler form.
  
 +
The [[Prime Number Theorem]] has long been proven using complex analysis ([[Riemann Zeta function]]), but in 1949 and 1950 an elementary proof by [[Paul Erdos]] and [[Atle Selberg]] earned Selberg the highest prize in math, the [[Fields Medal]]. In contrast, [[Andrew Wiles]]' proof of [[Fermat's Last Theorem]] is not an elementary proof.<ref name="Occam">http://www.occampress.com/fermat.pdf Page 5</ref>
  
The prime number theorem has long been proven using complex analysis (Riemann's zeta function), but in 1949 and 1950 an elementary proof by [[Paul Erdos]] and [[Atle Selberg]] earned Selberg the highest prize in math, the [[Fields Medal]].
+
== Significance of Elementary Proofs ==
  
----
+
Elementary proofs are preferred over non-elementary proofs for at least two reasons:
  
'''Sources:''' <references/>
+
*elementary proofs minimize the underlying assumptions, as in avoiding the assumption that there is a unique, algebraically manipulable square root of negative one
 +
*elementary proofs are typically impossible to simplify further in a logically significant manner
 +
 
 +
==References==
 +
{{reflist}}
  
 
[[Category:Mathematics]]
 
[[Category:Mathematics]]

Latest revision as of 18:08, 7 April 2012

An elementary proof or elementary technique in mathematics is a proof that uses only real numbers or real analysis rather than the use of complex analysis[1] or reliance on less rigorous axioms, such as the Axiom of Choice. An elementary proof typically cannot be improved by expressing it in simpler form.

The Prime Number Theorem has long been proven using complex analysis (Riemann Zeta function), but in 1949 and 1950 an elementary proof by Paul Erdos and Atle Selberg earned Selberg the highest prize in math, the Fields Medal. In contrast, Andrew Wiles' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is not an elementary proof.[2]

Significance of Elementary Proofs

Elementary proofs are preferred over non-elementary proofs for at least two reasons:

  • elementary proofs minimize the underlying assumptions, as in avoiding the assumption that there is a unique, algebraically manipulable square root of negative one
  • elementary proofs are typically impossible to simplify further in a logically significant manner

References