Lemma 2.2.3. For any natural numbers $n$ and $m$, $n + ( m{+}+)$ = $(n+m){+}+$: Analysis 1, Terence Tao












2












$begingroup$


I'm self-learning real analysis using Terence Tao Analysis books. The book is very lucid. But in some cases Terence quickly go through the proof. And it becomes difficult for lesser mortals like us to understand. Lemma 2.2.3 is one of them. So, I'm requesting you guyz if you can help me understand this proof. The proof is the following:




enter image description here




The portion, I'm not getting is:




But by definition of addition, $0 + (m{+}+) = m{+}+$ and $0 + m = m$, so both sides are equal to $m{+}+$ and are thus equal to each other.




Why $m{+}+$ & $m$ are equal. Similay, he is using similar logic in following section:




Similarly, we have $(n{+}+ )+m = (n+m){+}+$ by the definition of addition, and so the right-hand side is also equal to $((n+m){+}+){+}+.$




These might be very simple logic. But I'm having hard time getting grasp of it. If someone can explain it, I'll be extremely grateful.



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    2












    $begingroup$


    I'm self-learning real analysis using Terence Tao Analysis books. The book is very lucid. But in some cases Terence quickly go through the proof. And it becomes difficult for lesser mortals like us to understand. Lemma 2.2.3 is one of them. So, I'm requesting you guyz if you can help me understand this proof. The proof is the following:




    enter image description here




    The portion, I'm not getting is:




    But by definition of addition, $0 + (m{+}+) = m{+}+$ and $0 + m = m$, so both sides are equal to $m{+}+$ and are thus equal to each other.




    Why $m{+}+$ & $m$ are equal. Similay, he is using similar logic in following section:




    Similarly, we have $(n{+}+ )+m = (n+m){+}+$ by the definition of addition, and so the right-hand side is also equal to $((n+m){+}+){+}+.$




    These might be very simple logic. But I'm having hard time getting grasp of it. If someone can explain it, I'll be extremely grateful.



    Thanks!










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$


      I'm self-learning real analysis using Terence Tao Analysis books. The book is very lucid. But in some cases Terence quickly go through the proof. And it becomes difficult for lesser mortals like us to understand. Lemma 2.2.3 is one of them. So, I'm requesting you guyz if you can help me understand this proof. The proof is the following:




      enter image description here




      The portion, I'm not getting is:




      But by definition of addition, $0 + (m{+}+) = m{+}+$ and $0 + m = m$, so both sides are equal to $m{+}+$ and are thus equal to each other.




      Why $m{+}+$ & $m$ are equal. Similay, he is using similar logic in following section:




      Similarly, we have $(n{+}+ )+m = (n+m){+}+$ by the definition of addition, and so the right-hand side is also equal to $((n+m){+}+){+}+.$




      These might be very simple logic. But I'm having hard time getting grasp of it. If someone can explain it, I'll be extremely grateful.



      Thanks!










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      I'm self-learning real analysis using Terence Tao Analysis books. The book is very lucid. But in some cases Terence quickly go through the proof. And it becomes difficult for lesser mortals like us to understand. Lemma 2.2.3 is one of them. So, I'm requesting you guyz if you can help me understand this proof. The proof is the following:




      enter image description here




      The portion, I'm not getting is:




      But by definition of addition, $0 + (m{+}+) = m{+}+$ and $0 + m = m$, so both sides are equal to $m{+}+$ and are thus equal to each other.




      Why $m{+}+$ & $m$ are equal. Similay, he is using similar logic in following section:




      Similarly, we have $(n{+}+ )+m = (n+m){+}+$ by the definition of addition, and so the right-hand side is also equal to $((n+m){+}+){+}+.$




      These might be very simple logic. But I'm having hard time getting grasp of it. If someone can explain it, I'll be extremely grateful.



      Thanks!







      real-analysis induction






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Dec 17 '18 at 15:34









      Christoph

      12.1k1642




      12.1k1642










      asked Dec 17 '18 at 15:15









      BetaBeta

      1256




      1256






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Tao never asserts that $m$ and $m++$ are equal. What he asserts is that $0+(m{+}+)=m{+}+$ and that $(0+m){+}+=m{+}+$. So, in particular, since both $0+(m{+}+)$ and $(0+m){+}+$ are equal to $m{+}+$, $0+(m{+}+)=(0+m){+}+$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer! This clears the doubt. But in the line "But by definition of addition, 0 + (m++) = m++ and 0 + m = m", why he added "0+m = m". We know by definition 0 + (m++) = m++. What's the reason for adding additional equation? Your answer completely explained what I asked. But just wanted to be thorough in my understanding. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:35










          • $begingroup$
            He needed to know that $0+m=m$ in order to deduce that $(0+m)++=m++$.
            $endgroup$
            – José Carlos Santos
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:37










          • $begingroup$
            For reasons of spacing, please use m{+}+ instead of m++ in MathJax.
            $endgroup$
            – Christoph
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:38










          • $begingroup$
            @JoséCarlosSantos: Perfect!! Thanks for your answer! Each step matter in maths :)
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:39












          • $begingroup$
            @Christoph: Sure...will do this from the next time.
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:40











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3044068%2flemma-2-2-3-for-any-natural-numbers-n-and-m-n-m-nm%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2












          $begingroup$

          Tao never asserts that $m$ and $m++$ are equal. What he asserts is that $0+(m{+}+)=m{+}+$ and that $(0+m){+}+=m{+}+$. So, in particular, since both $0+(m{+}+)$ and $(0+m){+}+$ are equal to $m{+}+$, $0+(m{+}+)=(0+m){+}+$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer! This clears the doubt. But in the line "But by definition of addition, 0 + (m++) = m++ and 0 + m = m", why he added "0+m = m". We know by definition 0 + (m++) = m++. What's the reason for adding additional equation? Your answer completely explained what I asked. But just wanted to be thorough in my understanding. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:35










          • $begingroup$
            He needed to know that $0+m=m$ in order to deduce that $(0+m)++=m++$.
            $endgroup$
            – José Carlos Santos
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:37










          • $begingroup$
            For reasons of spacing, please use m{+}+ instead of m++ in MathJax.
            $endgroup$
            – Christoph
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:38










          • $begingroup$
            @JoséCarlosSantos: Perfect!! Thanks for your answer! Each step matter in maths :)
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:39












          • $begingroup$
            @Christoph: Sure...will do this from the next time.
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:40
















          2












          $begingroup$

          Tao never asserts that $m$ and $m++$ are equal. What he asserts is that $0+(m{+}+)=m{+}+$ and that $(0+m){+}+=m{+}+$. So, in particular, since both $0+(m{+}+)$ and $(0+m){+}+$ are equal to $m{+}+$, $0+(m{+}+)=(0+m){+}+$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer! This clears the doubt. But in the line "But by definition of addition, 0 + (m++) = m++ and 0 + m = m", why he added "0+m = m". We know by definition 0 + (m++) = m++. What's the reason for adding additional equation? Your answer completely explained what I asked. But just wanted to be thorough in my understanding. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:35










          • $begingroup$
            He needed to know that $0+m=m$ in order to deduce that $(0+m)++=m++$.
            $endgroup$
            – José Carlos Santos
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:37










          • $begingroup$
            For reasons of spacing, please use m{+}+ instead of m++ in MathJax.
            $endgroup$
            – Christoph
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:38










          • $begingroup$
            @JoséCarlosSantos: Perfect!! Thanks for your answer! Each step matter in maths :)
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:39












          • $begingroup$
            @Christoph: Sure...will do this from the next time.
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:40














          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          Tao never asserts that $m$ and $m++$ are equal. What he asserts is that $0+(m{+}+)=m{+}+$ and that $(0+m){+}+=m{+}+$. So, in particular, since both $0+(m{+}+)$ and $(0+m){+}+$ are equal to $m{+}+$, $0+(m{+}+)=(0+m){+}+$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Tao never asserts that $m$ and $m++$ are equal. What he asserts is that $0+(m{+}+)=m{+}+$ and that $(0+m){+}+=m{+}+$. So, in particular, since both $0+(m{+}+)$ and $(0+m){+}+$ are equal to $m{+}+$, $0+(m{+}+)=(0+m){+}+$.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Dec 17 '18 at 15:35









          Christoph

          12.1k1642




          12.1k1642










          answered Dec 17 '18 at 15:25









          José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos

          161k22127232




          161k22127232












          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer! This clears the doubt. But in the line "But by definition of addition, 0 + (m++) = m++ and 0 + m = m", why he added "0+m = m". We know by definition 0 + (m++) = m++. What's the reason for adding additional equation? Your answer completely explained what I asked. But just wanted to be thorough in my understanding. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:35










          • $begingroup$
            He needed to know that $0+m=m$ in order to deduce that $(0+m)++=m++$.
            $endgroup$
            – José Carlos Santos
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:37










          • $begingroup$
            For reasons of spacing, please use m{+}+ instead of m++ in MathJax.
            $endgroup$
            – Christoph
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:38










          • $begingroup$
            @JoséCarlosSantos: Perfect!! Thanks for your answer! Each step matter in maths :)
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:39












          • $begingroup$
            @Christoph: Sure...will do this from the next time.
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:40


















          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer! This clears the doubt. But in the line "But by definition of addition, 0 + (m++) = m++ and 0 + m = m", why he added "0+m = m". We know by definition 0 + (m++) = m++. What's the reason for adding additional equation? Your answer completely explained what I asked. But just wanted to be thorough in my understanding. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:35










          • $begingroup$
            He needed to know that $0+m=m$ in order to deduce that $(0+m)++=m++$.
            $endgroup$
            – José Carlos Santos
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:37










          • $begingroup$
            For reasons of spacing, please use m{+}+ instead of m++ in MathJax.
            $endgroup$
            – Christoph
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:38










          • $begingroup$
            @JoséCarlosSantos: Perfect!! Thanks for your answer! Each step matter in maths :)
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:39












          • $begingroup$
            @Christoph: Sure...will do this from the next time.
            $endgroup$
            – Beta
            Dec 17 '18 at 15:40
















          $begingroup$
          Thanks for your answer! This clears the doubt. But in the line "But by definition of addition, 0 + (m++) = m++ and 0 + m = m", why he added "0+m = m". We know by definition 0 + (m++) = m++. What's the reason for adding additional equation? Your answer completely explained what I asked. But just wanted to be thorough in my understanding. Thanks again!
          $endgroup$
          – Beta
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:35




          $begingroup$
          Thanks for your answer! This clears the doubt. But in the line "But by definition of addition, 0 + (m++) = m++ and 0 + m = m", why he added "0+m = m". We know by definition 0 + (m++) = m++. What's the reason for adding additional equation? Your answer completely explained what I asked. But just wanted to be thorough in my understanding. Thanks again!
          $endgroup$
          – Beta
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:35












          $begingroup$
          He needed to know that $0+m=m$ in order to deduce that $(0+m)++=m++$.
          $endgroup$
          – José Carlos Santos
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:37




          $begingroup$
          He needed to know that $0+m=m$ in order to deduce that $(0+m)++=m++$.
          $endgroup$
          – José Carlos Santos
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:37












          $begingroup$
          For reasons of spacing, please use m{+}+ instead of m++ in MathJax.
          $endgroup$
          – Christoph
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:38




          $begingroup$
          For reasons of spacing, please use m{+}+ instead of m++ in MathJax.
          $endgroup$
          – Christoph
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:38












          $begingroup$
          @JoséCarlosSantos: Perfect!! Thanks for your answer! Each step matter in maths :)
          $endgroup$
          – Beta
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:39






          $begingroup$
          @JoséCarlosSantos: Perfect!! Thanks for your answer! Each step matter in maths :)
          $endgroup$
          – Beta
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:39














          $begingroup$
          @Christoph: Sure...will do this from the next time.
          $endgroup$
          – Beta
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:40




          $begingroup$
          @Christoph: Sure...will do this from the next time.
          $endgroup$
          – Beta
          Dec 17 '18 at 15:40


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3044068%2flemma-2-2-3-for-any-natural-numbers-n-and-m-n-m-nm%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Quarter-circle Tiles

          build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

          Mont Emei