[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Mathematica Prove[...] Command Possible?
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg127920] Mathematica Prove[...] Command Possible?
*From*: amzoti <amzoti at gmail.com>
*Date*: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 02:28:06 -0400 (EDT)
*Delivered-to*: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
*Delivered-to*: l-mathgroup@wolfram.com
*Delivered-to*: mathgroup-newout@smc.vnet.net
*Delivered-to*: mathgroup-newsend@smc.vnet.net
Hello,
I have always been curious if Mathematica has ever considered a Prove command?
The reason one could ask such is question is simple, who would have ever thought that CASs would get to where they are in such a relatively short period of time.
Certainly, this is a tall order, but the richness we already see in Mathematica leads one to believe that this can be a new area for CAS development.
Some easy examples could be Prove[ Sqrt[2], Irrational], Prove[ Exp[x], Transcendental], Prove[Sum[i, {i, 1, n}]== n(n+1)/2]...
Certainly, there would be many limitations with proofs in some branches of Mathematics. I suppose getting to meatier proofs is problematic in itself, but maybe a certain rigor in defining the problem can be mapped out that follows how we set problems up today (as there is a pretty consistent way to specifying problems that most mathematicians adhere to).
Anyway, why has this not been attempted (as a comparison, I have seen like DC Proof)? In the end, maybe it is just not a goal for a CAS.
Thanks for your time.
Prev by Date:
**Re: DSolve for a real function**
Next by Date:
**Re: A problem with Manipulate**
Previous by thread:
**Re: DSolve for a real function**
Next by thread:
**Re: Command Possible?**
| |