Katana VentraIP

Mathematical proof

A mathematical proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement, showing that the stated assumptions logically guarantee the conclusion. The argument may use other previously established statements, such as theorems; but every proof can, in principle, be constructed using only certain basic or original assumptions known as axioms,[2][3][4] along with the accepted rules of inference. Proofs are examples of exhaustive deductive reasoning which establish logical certainty, to be distinguished from empirical arguments or non-exhaustive inductive reasoning which establish "reasonable expectation". Presenting many cases in which the statement holds is not enough for a proof, which must demonstrate that the statement is true in all possible cases. A proposition that has not been proved but is believed to be true is known as a conjecture, or a hypothesis if frequently used as an assumption for further mathematical work.

Proofs employ logic expressed in mathematical symbols, along with natural language which usually admits some ambiguity. In most mathematical literature, proofs are written in terms of rigorous informal logic. Purely formal proofs, written fully in symbolic language without the involvement of natural language, are considered in proof theory. The distinction between formal and informal proofs has led to much examination of current and historical mathematical practice, quasi-empiricism in mathematics, and so-called folk mathematics, oral traditions in the mainstream mathematical community or in other cultures. The philosophy of mathematics is concerned with the role of language and logic in proofs, and mathematics as a language.

Nature and purpose[edit]

As practiced, a proof is expressed in natural language and is a rigorous argument intended to convince the audience of the truth of a statement. The standard of rigor is not absolute and has varied throughout history. A proof can be presented differently depending on the intended audience. To gain acceptance, a proof has to meet communal standards of rigor; an argument considered vague or incomplete may be rejected.


The concept of proof is formalized in the field of mathematical logic.[12] A formal proof is written in a formal language instead of natural language. A formal proof is a sequence of formulas in a formal language, starting with an assumption, and with each subsequent formula a logical consequence of the preceding ones. This definition makes the concept of proof amenable to study. Indeed, the field of proof theory studies formal proofs and their properties, the most famous and surprising being that almost all axiomatic systems can generate certain undecidable statements not provable within the system.


The definition of a formal proof is intended to capture the concept of proofs as written in the practice of mathematics. The soundness of this definition amounts to the belief that a published proof can, in principle, be converted into a formal proof. However, outside the field of automated proof assistants, this is rarely done in practice. A classic question in philosophy asks whether mathematical proofs are analytic or synthetic. Kant, who introduced the analytic–synthetic distinction, believed mathematical proofs are synthetic, whereas Quine argued in his 1951 "Two Dogmas of Empiricism" that such a distinction is untenable.[13]


Proofs may be admired for their mathematical beauty. The mathematician Paul Erdős was known for describing proofs which he found to be particularly elegant as coming from "The Book", a hypothetical tome containing the most beautiful method(s) of proving each theorem. The book Proofs from THE BOOK, published in 2003, is devoted to presenting 32 proofs its editors find particularly pleasing.

(i) P(1) is true, i.e., P(n) is true for n = 1.

(ii) P(n+1) is true whenever P(n) is true, i.e., P(n) is true implies that P(n+1) is true.

Then P(n) is true for all natural numbers n.

Undecidable statements[edit]

A statement that is neither provable nor disprovable from a set of axioms is called undecidable (from those axioms). One example is the parallel postulate, which is neither provable nor refutable from the remaining axioms of Euclidean geometry.


Mathematicians have shown there are many statements that are neither provable nor disprovable in Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice (ZFC), the standard system of set theory in mathematics (assuming that ZFC is consistent); see List of statements undecidable in ZFC.


Gödel's (first) incompleteness theorem shows that many axiom systems of mathematical interest will have undecidable statements.

Related concepts[edit]

Visual proof[edit]

Although not a formal proof, a visual demonstration of a mathematical theorem is sometimes called a "proof without words". The left-hand picture below is an example of a historic visual proof of the Pythagorean theorem in the case of the (3,4,5) triangle.

(1954), Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, Princeton University Press, hdl:2027/mdp.39015008206248, ISBN 9780691080055.

Pólya, G.

Fallis, Don (2002), , Logique et Analyse, 45: 373–88.

"What Do Mathematicians Want? Probabilistic Proofs and the Epistemic Goals of Mathematicians"

; Daoud, A. (2011), Proof in Mathematics: An Introduction, Kew Books, ISBN 978-0-646-54509-7.

Franklin, J.

; Simons, Rogers A. (2008). Proof and Other Dilemmas: Mathematics and Philosophy. MAA.

Gold, Bonnie

Solow, D. (2004), How to Read and Do Proofs: An Introduction to Mathematical Thought Processes, , ISBN 978-0-471-68058-1.

Wiley

Velleman, D. (2006), How to Prove It: A Structured Approach, Cambridge University Press,  978-0-521-67599-4.

ISBN

Hammack, Richard (2018), , ISBN 978-0-9894721-3-5.

Book of Proof

Media related to Mathematical proof at Wikimedia Commons

Proofs in Mathematics: Simple, Charming and Fallacious

A about proofs, in a course from Wikiversity

lesson