17 May
2005
17 May
'05
2:39 a.m.
It is an old joke, but does make some points about 'proof', the testing of proof and the nature of 'belief', at least for an interested amateur like me: a) instead of 'women', substitute 'men', 'work' etc - i.e., change a parameter of the theorem - carry out the same deductive steps - do you still believe the result, or - were you believing what you wanted to believe? b) the use of '=' on line 2 is wrong - an '==>' might have been better c) 'root' has more than one meaning - the notation used is not well-defined - 'informal' languages depend on context-sensitive semantics - hence the need for designer-formal notation Otherwise, the proof is excellent: I trust the son will revise his opinion in time. g