I actually posted something related to this about a couple of weeks ago, I was fed up with the lack of variety regarding proof methods since most of them stem from direct proofs, induction and contradiction. I tried thinking about something novel regarding direct proofs and ended up rediscovering proof by exhaustion, then I tried contradiction and couldn't think of anything.
I thought long and hard for about half an hour about how I'd go about exploiting induction and realized that since induction arguments can be applied to well ordered sets then they must be able to be applied for Q. It took me about a day to prove some auxiliary theorems and set the whole thing just right, I sent it to one of my proffessors and to my surprise said that the argument was and a fucking quote "spectacular". Fast forward a few weeks and here I am, waiting for my child to be released into the wild for mathematicians to use as a last resource when they are tired of thinking so they much rather brainlesly write about 4 pages making use of this devilish tool.
>>12317481>>12317969>>12320474>>12320474Thanks guys, shit has to get peer reviewed again so it's not gonna happen for at least a couple of weeks
>>12318022kek
>>12318934basically this
>>12320017>>12320024I could but I don´t wanna share the whole structure of the methods used until this shit get's published, lest i be Haruhi 2.0. I can tell you that the proofs I made are for statements in [0,1] and [0,1]^n respectively since shit involving arbitraty a,bs is a pain in the ass to do via this kind of induction.
>>12320031Open-closed arguments?
