Alternate “Proofs”
You know the faculty newsletter is awesome when you have articles like this:
Taken from the UWaterloo MathNews, Issue 111.2:
Alternate Proofs
Methods I wish were real…
Suppose P and Q are logical statements, use the following method to prove P–>Q
- Proof by Consensus: (also known as the scientific method) 4 out of 5 mathematicians say Q is true… therefore it is.
- Proof by Extortion: Suppose P is true and Q is not, then I punch you. Is Q true?
- Proof by Example: (the famed “engineer’s proof”) It worked once, therefore Q is true.
- Proof by Heresay: (alternative engineer’s proof) A mathematician told me it worked, therefore it does.
- Proof by Black Magic: Messy algebra. Messier Algebra. A random integral. Picture of a goat. Therefore Q is true
- Proof by Caroling: Three random sets. Two open balls. And a Q statement that’s clearly true
πρmaniac
As a student in Math 145 (where proofs are pretty much your life for 4 months), I started wishing these proofs were real too… which proves my complete unsuitability for pure mathematics.
I can see how you fit in, T.
I wish U of M was that cool. Instead, the manitoban has jokes emmbeded in a bunch of pointless text that no one reads…
“# Proof by Black Magic: Messy algebra. Messier Algebra. A random integral. Picture of a goat. Therefore Q is true
# Proof by Caroling: Three random sets. Two open balls. And a Q statement that’s clearly true”
I lol’d.
Also, blog=existing