How does one build an outline of a proof? What should it consist of? Should it proof the result without working out calculations or not? Thank you!
2026-04-14 11:24:34.1776165874
What is an outline of a proof?
1k Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in PROOF-WRITING
- how is my proof on equinumerous sets
- Do these special substring sets form a matroid?
- How do I prove this question involving primes?
- Total number of nodes in a full k-ary tree. Explanation
- Prove all limit points of $[a,b]$ are in $[a,b]$
- $\inf A = -\sup (-A)$
- Prove that $\sup(cA)=c\sup(A)$.
- Supremum of Sumset (Proof Writing)
- Fibonacci Numbers Proof by Induction (Looking for Feedback)
- Is my method correct for to prove $a^{\log_b c} = c^{\log_b a}$?
Related Questions in PROOF-EXPLANATION
- (From Awodey)$\sf C \cong D$ be equivalent categories then $\sf C$ has binary products if and only if $\sf D$ does.
- Help with Propositional Logic Proof
- Lemma 1.8.2 - Convex Bodies: The Brunn-Minkowski Theory
- Proof of Fourier transform of cos$2\pi ft$
- Total number of nodes in a full k-ary tree. Explanation
- Finding height of a $k$-ary tree
- How to get the missing brick of the proof $A \circ P_\sigma = P_\sigma \circ A$ using permutations?
- Inner Product Same for all Inputs
- Complex Derivatives in Polar Form
- Confused about how to prove a function is surjective/injective?
Related Questions in SOLUTION-VERIFICATION
- Linear transform of jointly distributed exponential random variables, how to identify domain?
- Exercise 7.19 from Papa Rudin: Gathering solutions
- Proof verification: $\forall n \in \mathbb{Z}, 4\nmid(n^2+2)$
- Proof verification: a function with finitely many points of discontinuity is Riemann integrable
- Do Monoid Homomorphisms preserve the identity?
- Cantor-Lebesgue's theorem
- If $a$ is an integer, prove that $\gcd(14a + 3, 21a + 4) = 1$.
- Number theory gcd
- $|G| > 1$ and not prime implies existence of a subgroup other than two trivial subgroups
- Prove/Disprove: Sum of im/ker of linear transformation contained in ker/im of each linear trasnfromation
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?
I'll give you an example from topology that might help - even if you don't know topology, the distinction between the proof styles should be clear.
Proposition: Let $S$ be a closed subset of a complete metric space $(E,d)$. Then the metric space $(S,d)$ is complete.
Proof Outline: Cauchy sequences in $(S,d)$ converge in $(E,d)$ by completeness, and since $(S,d)$ is closed, convergent sequences of points in $(S,d)$ converge in $(S,d)$, so any Cauchy sequence of points in $(S,d)$ must converge in $(S,d)$.
Proof: Let $(a_n)$ be a Cauchy sequence in $(S,d)$. Then each $a_n\in E$ since $S\subseteq E$, so we may treat $(a_n)$ as a sequence in $(E,d)$. By completeness of $(E,d)$, $a_n\to a$ for some point $a\in E$. Since $S$ is closed, $S$ contains all of its limit points, implying that any convergent sequence of points of $S$ must converge to a point of $S$. This shows that $a\in S$, and so we see that $a_n\to a\in S$. As $(a_n)$ was arbitrary, we see that Cauchy sequences in $(S,d)$ converge in $(S,d)$, which is what we wanted to show.
The main difference here is the level of detail in the proofs. In the outline, we left out most of the details that are intuitively clear, providing the main idea so that a reader could fill in the details for themselves. In the actual proof, we go through the trouble of providing the more subtle details to make the argument more rigorous - ideally, a reader of a more complete proof should not be left wondering about any gaps in logic.
(There is another type of proof called a formal proof, in which everything is derived from first principles using mathematical logic. This type of proof is entirely rigorous but almost always very lengthy, so we typically sacrifice some rigor in favor of clarity.)
As you learn more about a topic, your proofs typically begin to approach proof outlines, since things that may not have seemed obvious before become intuitive and clear. When you are first learning it is best to go through the detailed proof to make sure that you understand everything as well as you think you do, and only once you have mastered a subject do you allow yourself to omit obvious details that should be clear to someone who understands the subject on the same level as you.