Alternate methods of mathematical proof

Proof by obviousness:

• The proof is so clear that it need not be mentioned.

Proof by general agreement:

• All in favor?

Proof by imagination:

• Well, we’ll pretend it’s true...

Proof by convenience:

• It would be very nice if it were true, so...

Proof by necessity:

• It had better be true, or the entire structure of mathematics would crumble to the ground.

Proof by funding:

• We’re being paid to research this, so it had better be true.

Proof by plausibility:

• It sounds good, so it must be true.

Proof by intimidation:

• Don’t be stupid; of course it’s true!

Proof by omission:

• The reader may easily supply the details.

Proof by postponement:

• The proof for this is long and arduous, so it is given to you in the appendix.

Proof by avoidance:

• Limit of proof by postponement as it approaches infinity

Proof by accident:

• Hey, what have we here?!

Proof by insignificance:

• Who really cares anyway?

Proof by profanity:

• (example omitted)

Proof by definition:

• We define it to be true.

Proof by tautology:

• It’s true because it’s true.

Proof by lack of interest:

• Does anyone really care about this?

Proof by logic:

• If it’s on the problem sheet, it must be true!

Proof by FACTS AND LOGIC:

• It’s just obvious! Wake up, you brainwashed soycucks!

Proof by clever variable choice:

• Let A be the number such that this proof works...

Proof by tessellation:

• This proof is the same as the last.

Proof by divine word:

• And the Lord said, ’Let it be true,’ and it was true.

Proof by stubbornness:

• I don’t care what you say; it is true.

Proof by hasty generalization:

• Well, it works for 17, so it works for all reals.

Proof by deception:

• Now everyone turn their backs...

Proof by authority:

• Einstein says it’s true, so...

Proof by intuition:

• I have this gut feeling.

Proof by Fermat:

• This theorem has a truly marvelous proof which this margin is too narrow to contain.

Proof by ontology:

• There is an absolutely perfect proof of this theorem somewhere in the universe. If the proof didn’t exist, it wouldn’t be perfect, thus it must exist and the theorem must be true.

Proof by gaslighting:

• Don’t you remember? I proved that last week.

Proof by Rule 34:

• If there exists a positive integer whose Collatz sequence does not reach 1, then by Rule 34, there is porn of it. There is not porn of it; thus it does not exist.

Proof by reduction to the wrong problem:

• To prove the Collatz Conjecture, we simply reduce it to the twin prime theorem.

Proof by plagarism:

• As shown on page 503...

Proof by lost reference:

• I’m sure I saw it somewhere...

Proof by inaccessibility:

• 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 ghost reference:

• Nothing even remotely resembling the cited theorem appears in the reference given.

Proof by internet girlfriend:

• The proof is real, it just lives in Canada.

Proof by condescension:

• If you can’t see why this is true, I can’t be bothered to explain it.

Proof by personal communication:

• Eight-dimensional colored cycle stripping is NP-complete [Karp, personal communication].