# Commits

committed 9ae59ee

Section VS, added a semi-colon (Gavin Tranter)

• Participants
• Parent commits 5e9bdec

# File changes.txt

` Edit: Sage CNIP, removed obsolete discussion (Michael DuBois)`
` Edit: Stronger finish to proof of Theorem TT (Anna Dovzhik)`
` Edit: Wording in Exercise MM.T52 (Dan Drake)`
`+Edit: Section VS, added a semi-colon (Gavin Tranter)`
` Change: Theorem ISRN demoted to Exercise TSS.T11`
` Change: Prefer "pivot columns" over "leading 1", Chapter SLE`
` Typo: C^n in statement of Theorem SLSLC`

# File src/section-VS.xml

` </proof>`
` </theorem>`
` `
`-<p>Here's another one that sure looks obvious.  But understand that we have chosen to use certain notation because it makes the theorem's conclusion look so nice.  The theorem is not true because the notation looks so good, it still needs a proof.  If we had really wanted to make this point, we might have defined the additive inverse of \$\vect{u}\$ as \$\vect{u}^\sharp\$.  Then we would have written the defining property, <acroref type="property" acro="AI" />, as \$\vect{u}+\vect{u}^\sharp=\zerovector\$.  This theorem would become \$\vect{u}^\sharp=(-1)\vect{u}\$.  Not really quite as pretty, is it?</p>`
`+<p>Here's another one that sure looks obvious.  But understand that we have chosen to use certain notation because it makes the theorem's conclusion look so nice.  The theorem is not true because the notation looks so good; it still needs a proof.  If we had really wanted to make this point, we might have defined the additive inverse of \$\vect{u}\$ as \$\vect{u}^\sharp\$.  Then we would have written the defining property, <acroref type="property" acro="AI" />, as \$\vect{u}+\vect{u}^\sharp=\zerovector\$.  This theorem would become \$\vect{u}^\sharp=(-1)\vect{u}\$.  Not really quite as pretty, is it?</p>`
` `
` <theorem acro="AISM" index="additive inverse!from scalar multiplication">`
` <title>Additive Inverses from Scalar Multiplication</title>`