Mishikichikimikata Morukushirukikumei Molu Fumodoshi Chikukamirikitoji

    1.  Mishikichikimikata kitomikitekutochi katokatafuarikiari
  

    2.  Mekufu kiariaridokuari/mimotomikushitoari kito midoshishikutochi shimotaku

   
    3.   Zumodoshitota/tekikashifu/tutaji lushimorin chikukamirikitoji

    4.  Kashikukaari  molu nokashichimidotakashi kito chikukamirikitoji

    5.  Tekukunokushi kunanotamoshikachikito molu  kiariaridokuari shikakiarikute kito nomoshichilumotakimo

Maths Banter

Over the years I'm sure you've seen many types of proof, in your next lecture; see if you can spot these lesser-known types:

Proof by cumbersome notation:
Best done with access to at least four alphabets and special symbols.

Proof by reference to inaccessible literature:
The author cites a simple corollary of a theorem to be found in a privately circulated memoir of the Slovenian Philological Society, 1883.

Proof by importance:
A large body of useful consequences all follow from the proposition in question.

Proof by intimidation:
"Trivial."

Proof by metaproof:
A method is given to construct the desired proof. The correctness of the method is proved by any of these techniques.

Proof by vehement assertion:
It is useful to have some kind of authority relation to the audience.

Proof by semantic shift:
Some of the standard but inconvenient definitions are changed for the statement of the result.

Proof by accumulated evidence:
Long and diligent search has not revealed a counterexample.  

Evariste Galois

Unfortunately what is little recognized is that the most worthwhile scientific books are those in which the author clearly indicates what he does not know; for an author most hurts his readers by concealing difficulties.

--Evarist Galois

I blog because I want to:

1)  Introduce some unexpected influences and ideas into my intellectual and academic work. I want to unsettle the overly domesticated, often hermetic thinking that comes with academic specialization. I want to introduce a "mutational vector" into my scholarly and intellectual work.

2)  Publish small writings, odd writings, leftover writings, lazy speculations, half-formed hypotheses. I want a place to publish all the things that I think have some value but not enough to constitute legitimate scholarship. I want a chance to branch into new areas of specialization at a reduced level of intensity and seriousness.


3)  Find out how much of my scholarly work is usefully translatable into a wider public conversation.


Tim Burke, Swarthmore College
weblogs.swarthmore.edu/burke