Which of the following ways is preferable to formulate a proposition including much uncommon notation?
1) [half-page description of the notation in style "Consider projections of similar convex polyhedrons to a plane, orthogonal to S. Define section as..., sizes x of section as..., 3D size a as..., orientation $\Theta$ as.... Define the following dimensional parameters of such projection: $x_{i,j}$, $y_{i,j}$, where i is ... and j is..., $k_{i,j}=x_{i,j}/a$, $p_{i,j}=y_{i,j}/ \sum_{i,j} y_{i,j}$... as shown in figure 1. Let $f_A(a)$ be...., $F_A(a)$ be ..."]
Proposition 1. The probability density function for sizes of section of similar convex polyhedrons equals $h_X x)| \Theta$ = an expression including $\sum_{i,j} F_A (x, k_{i,j})$, $p_{i,j}$, where all the notation is as defined over.
Proof <...>
2)[A description only of the heaviest notation with reference to the figure 1.]
Proposition 1. The probability density function for sizes of section of similar convex polyhedrons, having true 3D size distribution density $f_A (a)$ equals
$h_X x)| \Theta$ = an expression including $\sum_{i,j} F_A (x, k_{i,j})$, $p_{i,j}$, where $F_A(x)$ is a cumulative distribution function for A and the dimensional parameters $k_{i,j}$, $p_{i,j}$ are as defined over.
Proof <...>
3)Proposition 1. Let [half-page description in the same style as in "1)" and reference to figure 1.] Then $h_X x)| \Theta$ = an expression including $\sum_{i,j} F_A (x, k_{i,j})$, $p_{i,j}$
Proof <...>
4) Let [half-page description in the same style as in "1)" and reference to figure 1].
Then [half-page proof].
Consequently,
Proposition 1. The probability density function for sizes of section of similar convex polyhedrons equals
$h_X x)| \Theta$ = an expression including $\sum_{i,j} F_A (x, k_{i,j})$, $p_{i,j}$
5) Perhaps there are much better ways to express such things? I would appreciate any suggestions or references how to write it clearly.