Lets do something meaningless... :P

I was tired solving maths problems , then I stopped for a minute and I thought of doing something meaningless which includes my friend Trevor A (prototype) and the brilliant avatar Trevor B.So what I am going to prove where TREVORTREVOR is an integer is that :

min(TREVOR)=±1\Large min(TREVOR) = \pm 1

Proof:

Lets assume that TREVOR A>TREVOR BTREVOR \ A > TREVOR \ B.

But 1<2A<B1<2 \Rightarrow A<B

By multiplying both the sides by TREVORTREVOR , the inequality sign flips which tells us that:

min(TREVOR)=1\Large min(TREVOR) = -1

Lets consider another case TREVOR A<TREVOR BA<BTREVOR \ A < TREVOR \ B \\ A < B

By multiplying both the sides by TREVORTREVOR , the inequality sign remains the same which tells us that :

min(TREVOR)=1\Large min(TREVOR) = 1

Let us consider one more case TREVOR A=TREVOR BTREVOR \ A = TREVOR \ B

But A<BA<B makes it impossible hence , TREVOR ATREVOR BTREVOR \ A \neq TREVOR \ B. Hence this case does not hold true.

At last we conclude that min(TREVOR)=±1min(TREVOR) = \pm 1

I hope this made you feel nice in your busy study schedule.Cheers!

Note by Nihar Mahajan
4 years, 6 months ago

No vote yet
1 vote

  Easy Math Editor

This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.

When posting on Brilliant:

  • Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
  • Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
  • Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
  • Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.

MarkdownAppears as
*italics* or _italics_ italics
**bold** or __bold__ bold

- bulleted
- list

  • bulleted
  • list

1. numbered
2. list

  1. numbered
  2. list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
paragraph 1

paragraph 2

paragraph 1

paragraph 2

[example link](https://brilliant.org)example link
> This is a quote
This is a quote
    # I indented these lines
    # 4 spaces, and now they show
    # up as a code block.

    print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.

print "hello world"
MathAppears as
Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3 2×3 2 \times 3
2^{34} 234 2^{34}
a_{i-1} ai1 a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3} 23 \frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2} 2 \sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3 i=13 \sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta sinθ \sin \theta
\boxed{123} 123 \boxed{123}

Comments

Sort by:

Top Newest

@Nihar Mahajan, as a continued exercise, prove the following:

ζ(TREVOR A)=69\zeta(\textrm{TREVOR A})=69

Prasun Biswas - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

So you're telling me that TREVOR A=1.014615241815\text{TREVOR A}=1.014615241815?

This might be a new discovery you've had... As it follows the constraint that min(TREVOR)=±1min(TREVOR)=\pm1

Trevor Arashiro - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Should I publish the proof myself in Arxiv?

I also have a maximum upper bound for the A version but I'm lacking a complete proof since I haven't researched on the B version.

Prasun Biswas - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Lol. But i don't know zeta function yet. :(

Nihar Mahajan - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Let me enlighten you. The value ζ(TREVOR A)\zeta(\textrm{TREVOR A}) is a special value, unlike the rest of the zeta function values. I suspect that it might be the key to proving the Trevormann hypothesis since it has a real part of 6969 and is still a zero of the Trevormann zeta function.

@Pi Han Goh, I think you should look into this. We have stumbled upon yet another discovery. Shall we uncover it together?

Prasun Biswas - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Prasun Biswas LOL...Omg ... if its established , it would be really amazing :P

Nihar Mahajan - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

:3 this actually made me laugh pretty hard. Haha.

But you forgot to consider the case of TREVOR=0TREVOR=0. In which case the world implodes.

Trevor Arashiro - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Kaboobly Doo!

Agnishom Chattopadhyay Staff - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Yeah, Kaboobly Doo Stuff :P XD

Mehul Arora - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Trevor Arashiro @Trevor B. Do read this note. :P

Nihar Mahajan - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Well the proof is not complete, you need to prove that A <B ...... 😛😛

Harsh Shrivastava - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

I have proved it. A=1 , B=2 so , A < B . :P

Nihar Mahajan - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

How can u assume that A = 1 & B= 1?? :P

Harsh Shrivastava - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Harsh Shrivastava @Harsh Shrivastava , He assumed the values of A and B to Be their "Place" values in the alphabet :P. Also, Nice Proof, @Nihar Mahajan XD

Mehul Arora - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Mehul Arora ikr , XD :P

Nihar Mahajan - 4 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

LOL , What is this? Are you okay?

Nitesh Chaudhary - 4 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

Yes , I am okay. If you don't understand its ok.Its just a time pass stuff.

Nihar Mahajan - 4 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...