‘Smart Proof’: Is smart proof a bad idea?
The term smart proof was coined by mathematician and mathematician John Nash in 1967, when the concept of proof by induction was first invented.
Nash said in a 1969 article in Scientific American: I have not invented proof by inductive reasoning, but I have made a point to define the concept as an induction from one proposition to another.
Proof by induction has become a cornerstone of scientific inquiry, because it provides a logical foundation for the construction of a system of theories.
Nash argued that a system’s success depends on the strength of the induction, and that “if the theory is not strong, it is not successful.”
In addition to using inductive logic, Nash was also a fan of proofs by induction.
In his 1970 book “The Art of Mathematics,” Nash famously argued that if you can prove that a hypothesis is true, then you can conclude that the universe is real.
In 2014, I spoke to Nash at the National Museum of Mathematics in Washington, D.C., and he told me that smart proofs and proofs by inductions are both necessary and important.
So, we need smart proofs,” he added. “
If they are able to verify that the whole universe is true and that the truth is true then they will believe it, which is a fundamental step in scientific knowledge.”
I don’t know of any other way.””
There are a number of ways of doing it, and we should use all of them.
I don’t know of any other way.”
He continued: “If we can demonstrate that we are right about a hypothesis, then we can prove it to the rest of the world, and if we can do that, then the universe must be real, and therefore, if the universe were real, then it would be real.
So, if we are able not only to prove the truth but also to prove that the Universe is real, it becomes much easier to believe in the universe.”
If the proof is strong enough, the world can be proven to be real Nash said, and he added that there are two ways to do that.
The first way is to make a computer program that can do this, and it is called a proof-by-computer.
Nash has developed several versions of this program, called a “prover.”
The proof- by-computer is a powerful tool for proving a theory, because we have a computer that is trained to recognize the true meaning of the statement.
But it is difficult to do the proof by computer, because the machine has no human input, and because we are in the process of computing.
Nash says that he can’t guarantee that the computer can be trained to do this.
“We have to make the computer do it.
I can’t tell you how many times we have tried to do it, but it has been done,” Nash said of the proof-through-computer method.
“We have tried it on people, we have trained computers to do all sorts of things, but nothing is good enough.
It takes a long time, and I am not sure we can give a guarantee that it will be good enough.”
Another way to do a proof is to use a computer simulation of the truth-producing process, such as a simulation of an electron or a vacuum.
The problem is that this method is too computationally intensive, and Nash admits that it can be difficult to implement a simulation that can reproduce the truth producing process.
“The first one that I found that worked was a simulation, which I believe is a very nice simulation, and then I found the second one that was very hard to do, and so I did the third one and it worked,” he said.
But, Nash believes that he is close to achieving the goal of proof-via-computer and that he will be able to create the world’s first real computer program.
“In the near future, if you want to do something that is going to be of great significance to humanity, then this is the way you are going to do,” Nash explained.
“You are going go out and get some scientists, some mathematicians, some physicists, and you are just going to go out there and simulate it, so you can see if you are right or not, and see if the simulation is right.
And if it is, then that’s great.”