Beautiful theorems with short proof - MathOverflow [closed]most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-06-19T19:38:03Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/106859http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proofBeautiful theorems with short proofJörg Neunhäuserer2012-09-10T23:55:37Z2012-09-11T05:23:13Z
<p>I like to ask for beautiful mathematical theorems with short proof. A proof is short in my sense if it is at most one page assuming basic notations and very basic results a second year student will know and understand. I do not like to discuss what beauty means...I have now written down a script with 107 such theorems (in my sense) and their proof and I have ideas for another 20. One the one hand I would be very thankful for theorems I have yet not considered. On the other hand I like to see if there is some consensus which theorems with a short proof are beautiful.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proof/106863#106863Answer by dmdmdmdmdmd for Beautiful theorems with short proofdmdmdmdmdmd2012-09-11T00:45:30Z2012-09-11T00:45:30Z<p>Picard's little theorem is remarkable, and its one-line proof led Littlewood to remark that it would be the world's shortest Ph.D. thesis. </p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proof/106866#106866Answer by paul Monsky for Beautiful theorems with short proofpaul Monsky2012-09-11T01:02:58Z2012-09-11T01:02:58Z<p>Fermat's proof, by infinite descent, that there is no Pythagorean right triangle whose area is a square might qualify.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proof/106867#106867Answer by Igor Rivin for Beautiful theorems with short proofIgor Rivin2012-09-11T01:16:47Z2012-09-11T01:16:47Z<p>The standard evaluation of $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp(-x^2) dx.$</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proof/106869#106869Answer by Igor Rivin for Beautiful theorems with short proofIgor Rivin2012-09-11T01:26:08Z2012-09-11T01:26:08Z<p>@Paul Monsky's proof of Monsky's theorem: a complete proof starting from nothing takes <a href="http://stanford.edu/~moorxu/misc/equiareal.pdf" rel="nofollow">two pages.</a> (doesn't quite meet the criteria, but what the heck).</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proof/106870#106870Answer by Robert Israel for Beautiful theorems with short proofRobert Israel2012-09-11T01:26:27Z2012-09-11T01:26:27Z<p>L.M. Kelly's proof of the Sylvester-Gallai theorem: in any configuration of $n$ points in the plane, not all on a line, there is a line containing exactly two of the points.</p>
<p>See Aigner & Ziegler, "Proofs from the Book", chapter 8.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proof/106871#106871Answer by an12 for Beautiful theorems with short proofan122012-09-11T01:30:00Z2012-09-11T01:30:00Z<p>Euler's formula $$\mathrm{e}^{i \theta} = \cos \left( \theta \right) + i \sin \left( \theta
\right)$$ when considered as a theorem. From whatever angle you look at it, almost all the proofs are short and extremely beautiful.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proof/106872#106872Answer by an12 for Beautiful theorems with short proofan122012-09-11T01:55:16Z2012-09-11T01:55:16Z<p>Cantor's diagonal argument to prove that $\mathbb{R}$ is uncountable.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proof/106880#106880Answer by Jiang for Beautiful theorems with short proofJiang2012-09-11T03:16:25Z2012-09-11T03:16:25Z<p>The proof of Brouwer fixed point theorem by using fundamental group of $S^1$ is equal to $\mathbb{Z}$, while the fundamental group of $D^2$ is trivial.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106859/beautiful-theorems-with-short-proof/106885#106885Answer by paul Monsky for Beautiful theorems with short proofpaul Monsky2012-09-11T05:23:13Z2012-09-11T05:23:13Z<p>The proof(via the pigeon-hole principle--continued fractions would need too much preparation) that when D>0 is not a square then the "Pellian equation" xx-Dyy=1 has a non-trivial solution.</p>