Re: Provinf bounded variation
- From: "Konrad Viltersten" <tmp1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:02:50 +0200
Is it right to regard the problem this way?
Is there a more straightforward approach?
yes
Was it ment to be a "yes" as in [yes, yes] or is
it [yes, _]? I actually asked two questions.
Also, given that the approach applied by me is
correct, how could it be simplified? (That's not
part of the assigment so it can be discussed
freely - provided of course there is anything to
say, hehe).
--
Vänligen
Konrad
---------------------------------------------------
Sleep - thing used by ineffective people
as a substitute for coffee
Ambition - a poor excuse for not having
enough sence to be lazy
---------------------------------------------------
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Provinf bounded variation
- From: A N Niel
- Re: Provinf bounded variation
- References:
- Provinf bounded variation
- From: Konrad Viltersten
- Re: Provinf bounded variation
- From: A N Niel
- Provinf bounded variation
- Prev by Date: Re: Does the Calculus rest on Euclid?
- Next by Date: Re: Looking for a surjection or R^2
- Previous by thread: Re: Provinf bounded variation
- Next by thread: Re: Provinf bounded variation
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|