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 is an integer is that :
Proof:
Lets assume that .
But
By multiplying both the sides by , the inequality sign flips which tells us that:
Lets consider another case
By multiplying both the sides by , the inequality sign remains the same which tells us that :
Let us consider one more case
But makes it impossible hence , . Hence this case does not hold true.
At last we conclude that
I hope this made you feel nice in your busy study schedule.Cheers!
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:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
Sort by:
Top NewestLOL , What is this? Are you okay?
Log in to reply
Yes , I am okay. If you don't understand its ok.Its just a time pass stuff.
Log in to reply
Kaboobly Doo!
Log in to reply
Yeah, Kaboobly Doo Stuff :P XD
Log in to reply
@Nihar Mahajan, as a continued exercise, prove the following:
Log in to reply
Lol. But i don't know zeta function yet. :(
Log in to reply
Let me enlighten you. The value ζ(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 69 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?
Log in to reply
Log in to reply
So you're telling me that TREVOR A=1.014615241815?
This might be a new discovery you've had... As it follows the constraint that min(TREVOR)=±1
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.
Log in to reply
:3 this actually made me laugh pretty hard. Haha.
But you forgot to consider the case of TREVOR=0. In which case the world implodes.
Log in to reply
Well the proof is not complete, you need to prove that A <B ...... 😛😛
Log in to reply
I have proved it. A=1 , B=2 so , A < B . :P
Log in to reply
How can u assume that A = 1 & B= 1?? :P
Log in to reply
@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
Log in to reply
Log in to reply
@Trevor Arashiro @Trevor B. Do read this note. :P
Log in to reply