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:
-
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.
[End of document, updated to 16 June 1998]