Proof by intimidation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Proof by intimidation is a jocular term used mainly in mathematics to refer to mathematical proofs which are so complex, so long-winded and so poorly presented by the authors that others are simply forced to accept it, lest they be forced to sift through its minute details.^[1] The term is also used when the author is an authority in his field presenting his proof to people who respect a priori his insistence that the proof is valid or when the author claims that his statement is true because it is trivial or because he simply says so. Usage of this term is for the most part in good humour, though it also appears in serious criticism.^[2][3] More generally, "proof by intimidation" has also been used by critics of junk science to describe cases in which scientific evidence is thrown aside in favour of a litany of tragic individual cases presented to the public by articulate advocates who pose as experts in their field.^[4]

Gian-Carlo Rota claimed in a memoir that the term 'proof by intimidation' was coined by Mark Kac to describe a technique used by William Feller in his lectures.^[5]

[edit] See also

• Proofs from THE BOOK, both the antithesis of proofs by intimidation and the most intimidating of all proofs since they are God's.

[edit] References