英文字典中文字典


英文字典中文字典51ZiDian.com



中文字典辞典   英文字典 a   b   c   d   e   f   g   h   i   j   k   l   m   n   o   p   q   r   s   t   u   v   w   x   y   z       







请输入英文单字，中文词皆可：


请选择你想看的字典辞典：
单词字典翻译
Peano查看　Peano　在百度字典中的解释百度英翻中〔查看〕
Peano查看　Peano　在Google字典中的解释Google英翻中〔查看〕
Peano查看　Peano　在Yahoo字典中的解释Yahoo英翻中〔查看〕

安装中文字典英文字典查询工具!


中文字典英文字典工具:
选择颜色:
输入中英文单字

































































英文字典中文字典相关资料:


  • peano axioms - Definition of Natural Numbers which gives rigorous . . .
    So I know the first order theory that is Peano Arithmetic (just to ensure we are on the same page, it is a first order theory with signature $\{0, S, +, \cdot, = \}$ with the axioms: (i) All axioms from theory of pure equality, (ii) Zero and Successor Axiom (iii) 2 axioms on defining $+$ (iv) 2 axioms on defining $\cdot$ and (v) Induction
  • Peanos Axioms: Mathematical Philosophy - Mathematics Stack Exchange
    Dedekind and Peano, in the late 19th century set out to identify their essential properties from which, it was hoped, all others could be derived So successful were they in this regard, that, for all practical purposes, Peano's Axioms have come to define the natural numbers
  • Why do we take the axiom of induction for natural numbers (Peano . . .
    The Peano axioms Wikipedia page (currently) says as much It says the axiom of induction can be interpreted (in the context of Peano Axioms) as: If K is a set such that: 1 0 is in K, and 2 for every natural number n, n being in K implies that S(n) is in K, then K contains every natural number
  • Purpose of the Peano Axioms - Mathematics Stack Exchange
    Peano axioms come to model the natural numbers, and their most important property: the fact we can use induction on the natural numbers This has nothing to do with set theory Equally one can talk about the axioms of a real-closed field, or a vector space Axioms are given to give a definition for a mathematical object
  • A possibly different take on the old question: Why does
    Because you say, "we easily prove, using axioms for sum, ", so you are assuming the Peano axioms for sum (i e axiom $1$ and $2$) are true in your answer, when I am (kind of) questioning what the universe would look like if axiom $1$ were true but axiom $2$ were different to what it is $\endgroup$
  • calculus - Taylors Theorem with Peanos Form of Remainder . . .
    The Peano's form has very minimal assumptions and the approach in your answer can't really be used to prove it $\endgroup$ – Paramanand Singh ♦ Commented Jun 7, 2018 at 0:31
  • About ZFC, peanos axioms, first order logic and completeness?
    $\begingroup$ Peano intended his induction axiom to be 2nd order, but the theory known today as Peano Arithmetic (PA) is a first order theory: the induction axiom is a schema of countably many axioms, one for each first-order formula
  • set theory - ZF and Peano axioms - Mathematics Stack Exchange
    The Peano depend on the concept of sets, i e , sets need to be defined before the Peano axioms can be used This is incorrect There are several ways to deal with the Peano axioms without discussing sets at all The only Peano axiom which deals with sets explicitly, in some formulations, is the axiom of induction, which states
  • Counting numbers vs Natural numbers; Peano Axioms
    The Peano axioms (and their modern first-order successor, Peano Arithmetic) were somewhat successful in that, but nonetheless the crowning achievement of the whole program turned out to be a negative result: Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem tells us that every reasonable formal system for proving things about the integers will be incomplete





中文字典-英文字典  2005-2009