# Difference between revisions of "Fundamental Theorem of Sato"

m (spelling fixxxxx) |
|||

(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||

Line 5: | Line 5: | ||

Proof: | Proof: | ||

− | Method 1: Proof by | + | Method 1: Proof by Contradiciton |

Assume, for contradiction, that Sato is not amazing. | Assume, for contradiction, that Sato is not amazing. | ||

Line 18: | Line 18: | ||

There is only one Sato. By Pigeonhole, either Sato is amazing or he isn't (in this case, Sato goes in the unamazing pigeonhole). Fortunately, Sato cannot fit in a pigeonhole; hence, Sato is amazing. (Proved) | There is only one Sato. By Pigeonhole, either Sato is amazing or he isn't (in this case, Sato goes in the unamazing pigeonhole). Fortunately, Sato cannot fit in a pigeonhole; hence, Sato is amazing. (Proved) | ||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− |

## Latest revision as of 16:34, 12 May 2021

The Fundamental Theorem of Sato states the following:

Sato is amazing.

Proof:

Method 1: Proof by Contradiciton

Assume, for contradiction, that Sato is not amazing.

This is absurd. Therefore, Sato is amazing. (Proved)

Method 2: Proof by Authority

Whatever AoPS says is correct, and AoPS says that Mr. Sato is amazing. Thus, Mr. Sato is amazing. (Proved)

Method 3: Proof by Pigeonhole

There is only one Sato. By Pigeonhole, either Sato is amazing or he isn't (in this case, Sato goes in the unamazing pigeonhole). Fortunately, Sato cannot fit in a pigeonhole; hence, Sato is amazing. (Proved)