Ever since I determined mathematics - mainly set theory and number theory - was my main passion, and I began learning mathematics formally outside of the curriculum posed within secondary schools I have proved every single theorem I have learned, sometimes with the aid of sources, and thus kept all theorems I have learned up to Advanced Calculus in my head. However, this has took up a lot of the time I could have devoted to discovering new mathematics and progressing my studies at a further rate, but, I also can't truly advance to new mathematics without being able to formally prove all of its preliminaries as I have a physical feeling of being trapped once I do not fully understand everything about a particular theorem. So, my question is whether it is truly worth it to prove all the things you learn, although I fear I may have to stop proving things once the mathematics reaches undergraduate level. And, also, I can't physically and mentally progress into new mathematics without proving everything before it, should I report this to a doctor as I fear it will impact on me later in life.
2026-04-02 00:16:37.1775088997
Is it worth proving every theorem you learn?
2.7k Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in SOFT-QUESTION
- Reciprocal-totient function, in term of the totient function?
- Ordinals and cardinals in ETCS set axiomatic
- Does approximation usually exclude equality?
- Transition from theory of PDEs to applied analysis and industrial problems and models with PDEs
- Online resources for networking and creating new mathematical collaborations
- Random variables in integrals, how to analyze?
- Could anyone give an **example** that a problem that can be solved by creating a new group?
- How do you prevent being lead astray when you're working on a problem that takes months/years?
- Is it impossible to grasp Multivariable Calculus with poor prerequisite from Single variable calculus?
- A definite integral of a rational function: How can this be transformed from trivial to obvious by a change in viewpoint?
Related Questions in EDUCATION
- Good ideas for communicating the joy of mathematics to nine and ten year olds
- Is method of exhaustion the same as numerical integration?
- How do you prevent being lead astray when you're working on a problem that takes months/years?
- Is there a formula containing index of π (exclude index 1)
- How deep do you have to go before you can contribute to the research frontier
- What are the mathematical topics most essential for an applied mathematician?
- i'm 15 and I really want to start learning calculus, I know geometry, a little trig, and algebra 1 and 2 what is the best way to go about this?
- How to self teach math? (when you have other academic commitments)
- The Ideal First Year Undergraduate Curriculum for a Mathematics Autodidact
- How to solve 1^n=1 for n=0?
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
Ultimately, you should hopefully be able to prove the vast majority of the mathematics you know.
You do not necessarily need to prove things as you learn them, nor is it necessary or of benefit to do so. Oftentimes you will find that the proof for what you are learning is of a greater level and complexity than you can handle.
But as you learn new mathematics, the goal of a good mathematics curriculum is that you begin to understand the nuances that underpin basic math.
You begin to notice things, like the derivative of the volume of a sphere w.r.t. its radius is the surface area. Curious, no?
As you take further and further courses, into analysis, for example. In single-variable calculus, you might be taught about Taylor expansions, with some of the finer points about error estimates and derivations brushed under the carpet. Once you get to analysis you should be able to derive Taylor series.
The benefit of learning the proofs behind the maths you are learning is that you gain a deeper understanding of the "why." And in any field, whether it is math or physics or the humanities, advancing that question is the ultimate goal of further instruction.
Furthermore, I know many mathematicians who do not memorize facts or identities, but derive them on the spot. A friend of mine (a respected mathematician, whose name I will leave out for the sake of privacy) once said very aptly: "If you show a person a formula, they'll forget it within the hour. If you show them how you got the formula they'll remember it for their life." (rough paraphrase; his was more poetic)
As Qudit noted above, however, this can only last so long. If you continue into a lifetime of mathematical research (good for you!), there will always be more questions, and furthermore, you'll never have all of the answers.
I would suggest that instead of attempting to prove everything as you are told it, try and see how new material relates to what you already know. As you learn more, you should recognize more patterns and ultimately, more proofs.
And sometimes, such as in addition and multiplication, it is not worth reading Russell and Whitehead's 300 page opus to figure out that it is true.