View Single Post
Old 2012-04-02, 12:31   #11
princeps
 
Nov 2011

C16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by literka View Post
I noticed this shortly after uploading post.
I cannot compare your work with work of Inkeri, which I do not know. I have few editorial remarks, which may be useful for you.
Everywhere you use sign of equivalence but in Lemma 2.1. you use sign of equality.
I would, in your place, specify the range of x, y, in Lemma 2.1., since you use Lemma 2.1. for non-integer elements.
As far as I know Inkeri's proof isn't freely available...Thanks for your observations..
princeps is offline   Reply With Quote