Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The converse relation does satisfy the (weaker) axioms of a semigroup with involution: () = and () =. [12] Since one may generally consider relations between different sets (which form a category rather than a monoid, namely the category of relations Rel ), in this context the converse relation conforms to the axioms of a dagger category (aka ...
The converse of the theorem implies that a homothety transforms a line in a parallel line. Conversely, the direct statement of the intercept theorem implies that a geometric transformation is always a homothety of center O, if it fixes the lines passing through O and transforms every other line into a parallel line.
In the mathematical theory of automorphic forms, a converse theorem gives sufficient conditions for a Dirichlet series to be the Mellin transform of a modular form. More generally a converse theorem states that a representation of an algebraic group over the adeles is automorphic whenever the L-functions of various twists of it are well-behaved.
The first of these theorems is the spherical analogue of a plane theorem, and the second theorem is its dual, that is, the result of interchanging great circles and their poles. [32] Kiper et al. [ 33 ] proved a converse of the theorem: If the summations of the opposite sides are equal in a spherical quadrilateral, then there exists an ...
For example, the four-vertex theorem was proved in 1912, but its converse was proved only in 1997. [3] In practice, when determining the converse of a mathematical theorem, aspects of the antecedent may be taken as establishing context. That is, the converse of "Given P, if Q then R" will be "Given P, if R then Q".
This self-duality in the statement is due to the usual modern way of writing the theorem. Historically, the theorem only read, "In a projective space, a pair of centrally perspective triangles is axially perspective" and the dual of this statement was called the converse of Desargues's theorem and was always referred to by that name. [4]
One implication holds by the invariance of the integral by diffeomorphisms: = = =. For the converse, we apply Moser's trick to the family of volume forms := +.Since () =, the de Rham cohomology class [] vanishes, as a consequence of Poincaré duality and the de Rham theorem.
The converse of the triangle inequality theorem is also true: if three real numbers are such that each is less than the sum of the others, then there exists a triangle with these numbers as its side lengths and with positive area; and if one number equals the sum of the other two, there exists a degenerate triangle (that is, with zero area ...