Talk:Schröder-Bernstein theorem/Draft
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
"Details": "the induced induced image"? Boris Tsirelson 06:29, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. Corrected. --Peter Schmitt 12:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
"Proof:Proof":
probably should be
- Oops -- correct but not what is needed. --Peter Schmitt 23:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
"Monotone" in general may be understood as "either increasing or decreasing"; it is meant "(momotonely) increasing" or "isotone".
- Yes, that was negligent. --Peter Schmitt 23:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
"Proof:Proof":
- "By assumption, there are injective functions (...) that induce..."
I'd say
- "By assumption, there are injective functions (...); they induce..."
because the second part of the phrase is not a part of the assumption (but its consequence).
- True -- that is better. --Peter Schmitt 23:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
"Outline": the reader can guess what is denoted by f and g (or see the details), but we'd better let him know.
- I forgot that I did not introduce it before. --Peter Schmitt 23:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
"Details": probably also (4) is needed, explaining what are A2, B1 and B2 (which is easy) and why B1 is the image of A1 under f and A2 is the image of B2 under g (which is less easy).
- I was lazy -- I thought this is "obvious". --Peter Schmitt 23:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Boris Tsirelson 12:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks. --Peter Schmitt 23:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC)