If we were given the task of proving Euler's identity using a formal logic system, which logic system out there would be the most convenient for such a task? And more or less what would the proof look like, assuming that we are not allowed to "cheat" (i.e. we cannot go the "easy route" of assuming Euler's identity as axiom because ... that's just boring).
2026-03-25 00:07:54.1774397274
Most adequate logic system to formally prove Euler's identity (and what would the proof look like)?
90 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in LOGIC
- Theorems in MK would imply theorems in ZFC
- What is (mathematically) minimal computer architecture to run any software
- What formula proved in MK or Godel Incompleteness theorem
- Determine the truth value and validity of the propositions given
- Is this a commonly known paradox?
- Help with Propositional Logic Proof
- Symbol for assignment of a truth-value?
- Find the truth value of... empty set?
- Do I need the axiom of choice to prove this statement?
- Prove that any truth function $f$ can be represented by a formula $φ$ in cnf by negating a formula in dnf
Related Questions in FORMAL-PROOFS
- What is a gross-looking formal axiomatic proof for a relatively simple proposition?
- Limit of $f(x) = x \bmod k$
- Need help with formalising proofs in Calculus. Convergent and Divergent series:
- Proving either or statements (in group theory)
- Prove a floor function is onto/surjective
- Countability of Fibonacci series
- Can the natural deduction system prove $P \iff ¬P$ to show that it's a contradiction?
- How would I show that X is equivalent to ((¬X ↔ X ) ∨ X )?
- Variations in the Statement of Strong Induction: Equivalent or Different?
- Is this proof correct? (natural deduction)
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
The main hurdle to a complete formalization of this in the "usual" way would be formalizing the real numbers and the parts of real analysis that you would need and proving all the basic properties.
One approach to avoid this would be to use formal power series. These can be formalized as infinite sequences of, in this case, complex rationals, say. That is, simply functions $\mathbb N \to \mathbb Q[i]$. The function $a : \mathbb N \to \mathbb Q[i]$ would correspond to the formal power series $\sum_{n=0}^\infty a(n)x^n/n!$. The nice thing about this representation is that differentation is simply $Da(n) = a(n+1)$. You can then define the exponential function and $\sin$ and $\cos$ via "differential equations": $D\exp=\exp$ and $\exp(0)=1$ and $DD\sin=-\sin$, $D\sin(0)=1$, $\sin(0)=0$, $\cos=D\sin$. You'll, of course, need to formalize some of the basic arithmetic of formal power series, but this is much more straightforward than the reals. You'll also need to prove that those "differential equations" give unique solutions, but this isn't that hard. (Alternatively, you could just directly define the sequences.)
Given this, proving $\exp\circ\,iX = \cos + i\sin$ where $X(n)=\begin{cases}1,&\text{if }n=1\\0,&\text{if }n\neq 1\end{cases}$ is fairly straightforward. Just some simple equational reasoning for the most part. All of this would be relatively easy to formalize and do in something like Coq.
Proving $e^{i\pi}=-1$ will be trickier because you can't say $\pi$ in the approach I've suggested. However, you can pick some power series that evaluates to $\pi$ when evaluated at some (complex) rational. Call that power series $p$ and let's say $p$ evaluated at $1$ would be $\pi$. You could then make the composition $\exp\circ\, ip$. Then, the only bit of anything like real analysis you would need to do is prove that the resulting power series when evaluated at $1$ converges to $-1$. That is, given any positive rational $\epsilon$, you can find a natural $N_\epsilon$ such that $|{-1}-\sum_{n=0}^{N_\epsilon}(\exp\circ\, ip)(n)/n!| < \epsilon$. This will likely require some cleverness, though $p$ and $\exp\circ\, ip$ are likely to be fairly well-behaved. For example, it's likely you can arrange it so that you are working entirely with a rational sequence rather than a complex rational sequence, and it's likely you can get decent monoticinity properties. Ultimately, it will just be finding a bound for a sequence of (complex) rationals; nothing crazy should be needed. In particular, everything described is completely computable. If you did use Coq, for example, you'd actually be able to extract a program that when run would actually give you a natural number $N_\epsilon$ given a particular rational $\epsilon$, and then you could actually perform the summation up to the produced $N_\epsilon$ to verify that it is indeed within $\epsilon$ of $-1$.