Conference rusure::math

1011.0. "Proof by .... (funny)" by DIODE::CROWELL (Jon Crowell) Mon Jan 09 1989 17:59

Newsgroups: rec.humor.funny
Path: decwrl!labrea!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!ssbn!looking!funny-request
Subject: How to prove it
Posted: 29 Dec 88 11:30:04 GMT
Reply-Path: watmath!dalcs!uunet!mimsy!cvl!arensb
 
( This is/was posted on someone's door, whence I copied it. I don't have
the source handy, but if you want to have it before posting, let me know
and I can try to look it up.)
 
			HOW TO PROVE IT
                        ---------------
proof by example:
	The author gives only the case n = 2 and suggests that it 
	contains most of the ideas of the general proof.
 
proof by intimidation:
	'Trivial'.
 
proof by vigorous handwaving:
	Works well in a classroom or seminar setting.
 
proof by cumbersome notation:
	Best done with access to at least four alphabets and special
	symbols.
 
proof by exhaustion:
	An issue or two of a journal devoted to your proof is useful.
 
proof by omission:
	'The reader may easily supply the details'
	'The other 253 cases are analogous'
	'...' 
 
proof by obfuscation:
	A long plotless sequence of true and/or meaningless 
	syntactically related statements.
 
proof by wishful citation:
	The author cites the negation, converse, or generalization of 
	a theorem from the literature to support his claims.
 
proof by funding:
	How could three different government agencies be wrong?
 
proof by eminent authority:
	'I saw Karp in the elevator and he said it was probably NP-
	complete.' 
 
proof by personal communication:
	'Eight-dimensional colored cycle stripping is NP-complete 
	[Karp, personal communication].' 
 
proof by reduction to the wrong problem:
	'To see that infinite-dimensional colored cycle stripping is 
	decidable, we reduce it to the halting problem.' 
 
proof by reference to inaccessible literature:
	The author cites a simple corollary of a theorem to be found 
	in a privately circulated memoir of the Slovenian 
	Philological Society, 1883.
 
proof by importance:
	A large body of useful consequences all follow from the 
	proposition in question.
 
proof by accumulated evidence:
	Long and diligent search has not revealed a counterexample.
 
proof by cosmology:
	The negation of the proposition is unimaginable or 
	meaningless. Popular for proofs of the existence of God.
 
proof by mutual reference:
	In reference A, Theorem 5 is said to follow from Theorem 3 in 
	reference B, which is shown to follow from Corollary 6.2 in 
	reference C, which is an easy consequence of Theorem 5 in 
	reference A.
 
proof by metaproof:
	A method is given to construct the desired proof. The 
	correctness of the method is proved by any of these 
	techniques.
 
proof by picture:
	A more convincing form of proof by example. Combines well 
	with proof by omission.
 
proof by vehement assertion:
	It is useful to have some kind of authority relation to the 
	audience.
 
proof by ghost reference:
	Nothing even remotely resembling the cited theorem appears in 
	the reference given.
 
proof by forward reference:
	Reference is usually to a forthcoming paper of the author, 
	which is often not as forthcoming as at first.
 
proof by semantic shift:
	Some of the standard but inconvenient definitions are changed 
	for the statement of the result.
 
proof by appeal to intuition:
	Cloud-shaped drawings frequently help here.
 

proof by massive harrumphing:

     "Well I don't know enough modern math to supply a really formal proof,
      but since you're a mathematician you darn well ought to be able to
      do it yourself, don't be so stubborn about it".