

A Guide to Writing Mathematics [pdf] - vitoc
http://web.cs.ucdavis.edu/~amenta/w10/writingman.pdf

======
trentmb
[http://jmlr.csail.mit.edu/reviewing-
papers/knuth_mathematica...](http://jmlr.csail.mit.edu/reviewing-
papers/knuth_mathematical_writing.pdf)

------
rnhmjoj
Whats wrong with the "two-column method"? Formal proofs are written exactly
this way and I think it's very clear.

~~~
Jimmy
By most accounts, the majority of mathematics papers and textbooks feature
"informal" proofs, as opposed to "formal" proofs. Rather than work in a
clearly-defined formal system where every inference step is justified by some
axiom, the goal of most mathematical work is to produce human-readable
arguments aimed at other mathematicians, arguments that could "in theory" be
turned into formal proofs, but are not ultimately formal proofs themselves.
Granted, even these "informal" proofs are more rigorous and detailed than
virtually any argument seen outside of mathematics.

Furthermore, these informal proofs are written in standard, linear prose
(interspersed with copious mathematical terms and symbols of course) because
again the focus is on communicating the ideas, not on justifying every
individual step.

~~~
Retra
I can't wait for the day when something isn't considered proven until a
computer successfully executes the proof.

