Proofs are just busy work invented to give math undergrads something

Because of shitty definitions and proof techniques, Cauchy taught his students that infinite sums of continuous functions were continuous. With proper proof techniques, we now know that's bullshit.

>>9079018
Hello, Reddit. The answer to your question can be found at this link:
https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/6qxbz8/should_people_learn_proofs_if_they_arent_getting/

File: 1498166542547.jpg (25KB, 324x324px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 324x324px

>>9079033
>browsing reddit
Mathfags confirmed for ledditors.

>>9079018

> thinks proofs are useless
> wants a proof that they are wrong

>>9079018
Not really. Proofs are not something we do because we like to or because we are forced to. We have to do them because without proofs there is no math and that is something we learned the hard way in the 20th century.

>>9079018
Assume proofs are useless.
Then, no-one who doesn't like proofs will demand them.
You, who doesn't like proofs, demanded one, which is a contradiction.
QED.

>>9079018
You retard, Mathematics requires proofs at its present level of complexity. Without Mathematics as a tool for other fields, most of them would be useless as fuck and fall apart. No better than things like political theory and social science.

>>9079018
>Proofs are BS
>Demands a proof of wrongness
Nice b8 m8

File: 1499425596378.gif (2MB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 450x450px

>>9079018
DELETE THIS RIGHT NOW YOU BASTARD

>>9079018
Proofs are actually most useful on actually abstract mathematics when one cannot imagine the situation in their mind, then the formality will carry them forward.

>>9079033
>How can one appreciate the beauty of math without proofs?

What an argument. 10/10.

Yeah proofs are so dumb. Who would ever need a formal way of verifying whether or not a statement is factual. I can't imagine a single application for being sure you're right

>>9079018
This, proofs are for brainlets, just follow the logical path and you will be right. The greatest scientists and mathematicians had the intuition and knew they were right, proofs were just a formality

File: tumblr_lmt4b78rnh1qznjszo1_500.jpg (27KB, 500x254px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x254px

>>9079033
Filthy Reddit.

File: Richard_Feynman_Nobel.jpg (54KB, 280x396px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 280x396px

>>9080180
>How can one appreciate the beauty of math without proofs?
Physicists don't need proofs. Nobel in Physics like Richard Feynman considered long proofs & calculations a tedious waste of time.
That's why He created the Feynman diagrams which speed up calculation process to save time.
But Meth fags love to waste time writing hundreds of pages, proving obvious things.
Meth fags love an intellectual masturbation.

>>9079218
I suppose this is the subtle chuckle OP intended for us to have.

>>9079018
Good luck trying to present algorithms or formulae for a company without developing a proof to your supervisors

>>9080307
why not just prove that they work by using them?

>>9081410
Time and money to implement?
Could be seen and too large a risk finance wise, and proofs by definition let you know how well it will work.

>>9079018

Okay. Do everything ever without math, and without the surety of math. And also without notions of logic, or number. Throw chicken bones at walls and use that to decide whatever it is that you want to do with your life, my dear friend. Speak aloud the name of a color and will it to be of importance to what you want done. Do not keep a record of your findings, as this would constitute a quantitative analysis of some kind, which is unnecessary. Also don't bother trying to refute the above rhetorical connections, since such a train of argument would itself entail logic and reasoning, the stuff of a math proof which is unnecessary.

Just fling shit at a wall for a week and lick it and make love to your sister. Engineers are wont to these moments of weakness where they half-way re-discover a form of heterosexuality.

>>9081410
>Ok, so you've shown us that this algorithm works for a few hand-picked cases.
>But how do we know it works generally?
>"Durr, I guess I'll just try every single possible input and check that it work." - Person who thinks proofs are pointless

>when the mathboi preps a proof for the engineerbull