Hi everyone,
The grades for Exam #3 are posted under Dashboard / OpenLab Gradebook – the exams will be returned on Tuesday. Let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Prof. Reitz
Page 2 of 5
Written work, due Tuesday, November 27th, in class:
Chapter 10 p167: 1, 2, 5, 10, 15**
WeBWorK – none
OpenLab – none
** NOTE: Because of the exam on 10/27, this assignment due date is postponed until the following Tuesday, 12/4
Project – Feedback on Initial Draft of paper will be sent by email over the Thanksgiving break. Final Draft of paper due in class on Tuesday, 12/4.
Group Presentations on Tuesday, 12/4 and Thursday, 12/6.
Hi everyone,
The review sheet for Exam #3, taking place on Tuesday 11/27, is posted under Classroom Resources / Exam Reviews. As always, if you have any questions or notice any errors please let me know (by email, in person, or here on the OpenLab).
Best,
Prof. Reitz
I highly recommend the following two courses being offered in the Spring Semester – they are awesome, and will put to use many of the skills you learned in this class:
MAT 3050 Geometry I
MAT 3080 Modern Algebra
They are both required for math ed majors – for others, feel free to ask me about whether they are part of your program.
NOTE: Some students are having trouble enrolling because of prerequisite issues – if you run into this problem, email Prof. Douglas adouglas@citytech.cuny.edu for assistance.
Best,
Prof. Reitz
The last significant group assignment for your semester project is a group presentation (there will be one more individual assignment, a reflection on the process). I’ll put the details here, followed by an outline of the grading criteria (the presentation is worth 20 points total).
Semester Project – Group Presentation
This is your chance to share your group’s work with the rest of the class. Each group will give a 5-8 minute presentation, including the following items:
- State your conjecture (this should be written down, either on a slide or on the board). Give an explanation, and an example to demonstrate your conjecture.
- If you were able to prove your conjecture, give a proof. If not, describe briefly some of the ideas you had and strategies you tried while trying to prove it.
- Give the class at least one puzzle to work on on their own – a challenge!
- Give the audience a chance to ask questions (either during the presentation, or after).
Keep in mind the following:
- You must include some kind of slides (you may also put work on the board): PowerPoint, Google Slides, Prezi.com, LaTeX Beamer, or other.
- You may decide as a group how to divide up the work, but each group member must present something to class.
- Be aware that you will be asked at a later time to describe your own specific contributions as well as those of each group member.
- Presentations will be given at the beginning of class on Tuesday, 12/4 and Thursday, 12/4. Your group must sign up for a presentation time before leaving class on 11/13.
Grading Criteria (20 points total)
_____ points (4 possible). Basics. Stay within time limits (5-8 minutes). All group members participate.
_____ points (6 possible). Conjecture. Conjecture is written down. Explanation and example are provided.
_____ points (7 possible). Proof of conjecture or proof process description.
_____ points (3 possible). Challenge the class. At least one puzzle is given for the class to work on on their own.
____ points TOTAL (20 possible)
Presentations on Tuesday, 12/4:
- Group 1: Federico, Samantha, Yvan
- Group 2: Jess, Rachel, Alex
Presentations on Thursday, 12/6:
- Group 3: Danping, Franklin, Silvana, Jessie
Written work, due Tuesday, November 20th, in class:
Chapter 9 p152: 3, 4, 5
Chapter 10 p167: 1, 2, 5, 10, 15**
WeBWorK – none
OpenLab – none
Project – Initial Draft of paper due in class next Tuesday, 11/20 (feedback will be sent by email to group members).
Final Draft of paper due in class on Tuesday, 12/4.
Group Presentations on Tuesday, 12/4 and Thursday, 12/6.
**NOTE: Please work on Chapter 10 homework this week, BUT it will not be collected until the following Tuesday 11/27**
Hi everyone,
The group process paper will be worth 35 points towards your Project grade. I will be filling out the sheet below for each paper submitted. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best,
Prof. Reitz
Semester Project – Group Process Paper
Grading Criteria
_____ points (3 possible). Basics/formatting. Length (1500 words required). Group members names. Semester/Date/Course.
_____ points (2 possible). Puzzle description. Description given in own words, demonstrates understanding of puzzle mechanics.
_____ points (16 possible). Proof process narrative.
_____ points (4 possible). Shows progress across various stages of the project.
_____ points (4 possible). Includes all participating members of the group.
_____ points (4 possible). Includes objective facts (“what we did”) as well as experience (“how it felt, what it was like”).
_____ points (4 possible). Tells a story.
_____ points (5 possible). Conjecture.
_____ points (3 possible). State your group’s conjecture.
_____ points (2 possible). Proof or disproof of conjecture. If no proof or disproof was obtained, these points can be earned by clear explanation of proof process in the preceding account.
_____ points (9 possible). Images (3 points each). Original or clearly attributed. Includes caption. Connection to puzzle/process is evident.
____ points TOTAL (35 possible)
In his essay A Mathematician’s Lament, Paul Lockhart says “A good problem is something you don’t know how to solve.” This is quite different from most of the “problems” that appear in our mathematics education. In the past weeks, you’ve all spent some time individually and in groups working on such problems, in the context of graph theory (“Bridges and Walking Tours”).
As a group, write an account of your experiences working on your puzzle/problem. You should include the following elements:
- Description of the Bridges and Walking Tours problem, in your own words.
- An account of working on your problem as a group, from playing with the problem to formulating and perhaps proving a conjecture. What did your group do/think/feel? You can include examples of puzzles and solutions if you wish, as well as work by individual group members completed outside the group (both optional). Your goal is not to go over every detail, but to tell a story that your readers will enjoy – “what was it like”?.
- A statement of your group’s chosen conjecture, and a proof (or disproof) of the conjecture.
- At least three images (more if you wish). They can include images of puzzles you’ve created or solutions, but you can also be creative with images or photos related to your puzzle, your group or your story in some way. Each image should have a caption describing. NOTE: You may freely use your own drawings, images or photos. If you wish to use photos from another source, they must be from a legal source (for example, Creative Commons licensed, with proper attribution – the library or your professor can help with this).
- Basic details: the names of all group members, the date, course and section numbers, and your professor’s name.
I will be meeting with each group next Tuesday, November 13th, in class. Please be in touch with your other group members before then! Be prepared to discuss your progress so far – at the very least, you should be able to describe how you are dividing up the work of the paper among your group.
The first draft of this assignment is due in class on Tuesday, November 20. Each group should submit one paper, of no less than 1500 words. You may decide as a group how to divide up the work. Be aware that you will be asked at a later time to describe your own specific contributions as well as those of each group member.
The final draft of this assignment is due in class on Tuesday, December 4.
REGARDING SEMESTER PROJECT: As you may recall from the Course Description, the semester project is worth 10% of your overall grade. The project consists of a number of interrelated activities (many of which have already been completed) – complete details can be found on the Project Overview & Deliverables page. The group paper assigned here forms a significant portion of the project.
Written work – Due Tuesday, November 13, in class:
Chapter 8 p145: 3, 4, 7, 18, 19, 20
WeBWorK – none
OpenLab – none
Project – First draft of your group paper is due in class on Tuesday, 11/20.
EXAM #3 will take place on Tuesday, 11/27 (right after the Thanksgiving break).
Hi everyone,
Your midterm grades are posted on the OpenLab Gradebook (Dashboard / OpenLab Gradebook). Your grade is based on the following work completed so far:
Homework 30%, OpenLab 25%, Exams 45%
Midterm grade key:P: passing/satisfactory progress; likely to complete course requirements.U: failing/unsatisfactory progress; not likely to complete course requirements.BL: borderline; barely passing or just below passing; there is a reasonable expectation that the student will pass the courseSA: stopped attending; for students who were attending (at least once) and have now have stopped attending your class.WN grade: Student never attended. Do not assign this grade. This information was based on the “ verification of attendance” (VOA) roster you submitted at the 3rd week of the semester.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Prof. Reitz
Logic on Math StackExchange
- First order logic, why are the quantifier rules of inference reasonable? April 18, 2024This picture is from the book "Mathematical Logic, 2nd edition, Christopher C. Leary, Lars Kristensen" : I have two questions : Why are the quantifier rules of inference reasonable as they write in the start of the text ? Consider these variations : $$(\{\psi\rightarrow \phi\}, \psi \rightarrow (\exists x \phi)\})$$ $$(\{\phi\rightarrow \psi\}, (\forall x \phi) […]user394334
- Logical Definition of Isomorphism April 18, 2024I'm trying to define isomorphism in a logical way. Is the following statement true for Isomorphism's definition? Let $\langle S,⋆\rangle$ and $\langle S',⋆'\rangle$ be Algebraic Structures. These two structures are isomorphic if and only if: $$\left( \exists \phi : S \rightarrow S' \right) \left(\ \forall a,b \in S \right) \left[ \left( \phi (a⋆b) = \phi(a) […]Karaji
- Proof by contradiction square root of 3 is irrational [closed] April 18, 2024I think it requires circular thinking Please see this YouTube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQn47l2bt1g for details I found this alternative approach promising https://math.stackexchange.com/a/930492/1224828, and would like to know what is wrong with the approach in the YouTube video please.Caleb
- Is the inference rule another notation for $\implies$? April 18, 2024In mathematical logic, when we write a formula of the metalanguage (such as $A \vdash B$) above an horizontal rule and another formula (such as $\vdash A \to B$), is it the same as writing a meta implication sign $\implies$ between the two formulas?Anserin
- Prove that if a frame is dense then $\Box \Box A \to \Box A $ is valid [duplicate] April 18, 2024I am having trouble with the following question on modal logic. A modal logic frame $M =\langle W, R\rangle$ is dense whenever $$\forall x\forall y(Rxy\rightarrow\exists z(Rxz \land Rzy))$$ Prove that the formula $$\Box\Box A\to\Box A $$ is valid in every dense frame. We don't make any assumptions about the frames. How can this be done?A_alk
- Confusion on exercise on $(\mathbb Z, +)$ in Buechler's Stability theory book April 18, 2024Given as exercise 2.5.1: Show that the complete type realized by $1$ in $(\mathbb Z,+)$ is non-isolated. HINT Use the preceding exercise. The previous exercise: Let $\vec a$ and $\vec b $ be finite sequences from $\mathcal M.$ Prove that $\operatorname{tp}_{\mathcal M}(\vec a\vec b)$ is isolated iff $\operatorname{tp}_{\mathcal M}(\vec a/\vec b)$ and $\operatorname{tp}_{\mathcal M}(\vec b)$ […]spaceisdarkgreen
- Are there any problems about the difference between set theoretic definitions of polynomials? April 17, 2024I am a novice about this question, so if there is a misunderstanding then I apologize for it. As for Peano axioms, if I choose Zermelo natural numbers, and you choose von Neumann ones, then this doesn't cause any problems because we can prove Peano axioms are categorical i.e. it is guaranteed my model, and […]categoricalequivalent
- Application of the Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem for theories with uncountable signatures? April 17, 2024The Löwenheim-Skolem asserts the following: For a first order (L_(ω,ω)) theory with signature σ, every infinite σ - structure M and every infinite cardinal κ ≥ |σ|there is a σ-structure N such that |N| = κ and such that: if κ < |M| then N is an elementary substructure of M; if κ ≥ |M| […]SJe967
- Is this rule correct in sequent calculus? April 17, 2024In Ebbinghaus's book, the following rules occur in sequent calculus: $\dfrac{\Gamma \phi \dfrac{y}{x}}{\Gamma \forall x \phi}$, if y is not free in $\Gamma \forall x \phi$ $\dfrac{\Gamma \phi}{\Gamma \forall x \phi}$, if x is not free in $\Gamma$ I want to know if the following rule is also correct and how to prove its correctness/incorrectness: […]William
- $\exists x\in A \ (P(x))$ versus $\exists x \ (x\in A \land P(x))$ April 17, 2024I have a pretty simple question on mathematical logic. Consider two logical statements $\exists x\in A \ (P(x))$ and $\exists x \ (x\in A \land P(x))$. How are they logically different from each other?RFZ
Recent Comments