(i) Prove that $\displaystyle size(mn) \leq size(m) + size(n) $ for any n,m that are natural numbers.

(ii) Find m,n such that $\displaystyle size(mn) = size(m) + size(n)$

Printable View

- Oct 15th 2010, 04:06 PMjames12size(mn) proof
(i) Prove that $\displaystyle size(mn) \leq size(m) + size(n) $ for any n,m that are natural numbers.

(ii) Find m,n such that $\displaystyle size(mn) = size(m) + size(n)$ - Oct 15th 2010, 04:20 PMAlso sprach Zarathustra
What is the definition of "size(x)"?

- Oct 15th 2010, 07:56 PMjames12
That is the question.....

I think I'll just ask my lecturer tomorrow... This is from a cryptography course if that helps??

cheers - Oct 15th 2010, 09:30 PMtonio
- Oct 16th 2010, 12:54 AMjames12
Hence my post on here..... Was wondering if anyone else had come across something similar and could help me out??

- Oct 16th 2010, 03:00 AMtonio
- Oct 17th 2010, 03:38 PMjames12
Not exactly, someone could of pointed out what size(x) meant to give me a headstart i.e. help me out.. Then i probably could've accomplished the rest. I think you're just being a bit perdantic? Maybe if i posted a topic heading '' What does size(x) mean'' you would be satisfied?

- Oct 17th 2010, 04:17 PMBruno J.
Well, usually, stating the definition of whatever symbol is used in the statement of the problem is not considered to be much of a "headstart". It's unlikely that anyone would have done that. I think Tonio is right in feeling somewhat cheated. You should remember that people who help you here do so voluntarily and that the least you can do is make their job easier by being clear about the problem you're having. If you had done that in the first place, you would have saved everyone's time (including your own).

- Oct 20th 2010, 02:47 PMjames12Quote:

Originally Posted by**Bruno**

Further editing by moderator (MF)

My friend looked at this thread and he knew straight away what the 'problem' was. - Oct 21st 2010, 03:00 AMCaptainBlack