MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The popular MO question "Famous mathematical quotes" has turned up many examples of witty, insightful, and humorous writing by mathematicians. Yet, with a few exceptions such as Weyl's "angel of topology," the language used in these quotes gets the message across without fancy metaphors or what-have-you. That's probably the style of most mathematicians.

Occasionally, however, one is surprised by unexpectedly colorful language in a mathematics paper. If I remember correctly, a paper of Gerald Sacks once described a distinction as being

as sharp as the edge of a pastrami slicer in a New York delicatessen.

Another nice one, due to Wilfred Hodges, came up on MO here.

The reader may well feel he could have bought Corollary 10 cheaper in another bazaar.

What other examples of colorful language in mathematical papers have you enjoyed?

share|cite|improve this question

closed as off topic by Loop Space, Felipe Voloch, Kevin Buzzard, Mark Sapir, quid Dec 25 '11 at 19:17

Questions on MathOverflow are expected to relate to research level mathematics within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Latest paper, my co-author put in "but we will choose a more painful way, because there is nothing like pain for feeling alive" but the referee jumped on it. – Will Jagy Apr 23 '10 at 5:09
Maybe I should expand the question to include colorful language cut from serious mathematics papers :) – John Stillwell Apr 23 '10 at 5:18
By the way, your remark reminds me of another in a similar spirit that made it into the Princeton Companion. In his article on algebraic geometry, János Kollár says of stacks: "Their study is strongly recommended to people who would have been flagellants in earlier times." – John Stillwell Apr 23 '10 at 7:49
I was actually rather surprised recently by a referee who did not know the phrase “red herring”, and had to look it up. He insisted that we change it to something more understandable. It makes me wonder how much “colourful” language is weeded out by referees, and whether the mathematical literature is poorer for it. – Harald Hanche-Olsen Apr 24 '10 at 2:31
@Harald: If you intend your mathematical papers to be read by a wide range of readers, then write them in simple language, suitable for those who are relative beginners in English. I remember reading long ago some metaphoric phrase in a mathematics research paper, then imagining students all over the world getting out their English dictionaries, looking it up, and still not understanding what it meant. (I no longer remember what the phrase was, just this reaction to it.) – Gerald Edgar Apr 24 '10 at 15:43

109 Answers 109

Does merely transposing two words count? "It is also hard not to show that ..." [Arnold W. Miller, "Some Properties of measure and category," Trans. A.M.S. 266, 1981, p. 106]

share|cite|improve this answer
+1 A very nice alternative for using "it's easy to show", "trivial", "as one easily checks" etc. – Johannes Hahn Apr 25 '10 at 11:24

I've always marveled that the abbreviated terminology for "thickenings of the corresponding special Lagrangian" on the bottom of page 26 of this paper of Richard Thomas made it into print:

share|cite|improve this answer
That's an example of colourful language, not colorful language :) – François G. Dorais Apr 23 '10 at 19:55
He was inspired by the following famous UK comic: ( I saw him give a talk on the subject once. When the phrase came up all the English people in the audience laughed and everyone else looked around with very confused expressions on their faces. – Joel Fine Apr 24 '10 at 8:14
This is more colloquial than you think! The Fat Slags are a pair of well-known cartoon characters from Viz magazine. Given that he's a Brit, it's surely a reference to them. – Kevin Buzzard Apr 24 '10 at 8:20

Spivak, A Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry, Volume 1, p.94,

Now that we have a well-defined bundle map $TM \to T\;'M$ (the union of all $\beta_x^{-1} \circ \alpha_x$), it is clearly an equivalence $e_M$. The proof that $e_N \circ f_* = f \circ e_M$ is left as a masochistic exercise for the reader.

Volume 3, p. 103, indexed under "Idiot, any,"

These normalizations are usually carried out with hardly a word of motivation, as if they are so natural that any idiot would immediately think of doing them—in reality, of course, the authors already knew what results they wanted, since they were simply reformulating a classical theory.

From Volume 5, p.59,

We are going to begin by deriving certain classical PDE's which describe important (somewhat idealized) physical situations. The word "derive" had better be taken with a hefty grain of salt, however. What I have really tried to do is give plausible reasons why the physical situations should be governed by those PDE's which the physicists have agreed upon. I've never really been able to understand which parts of the standard derivations are supposed to be obvious, which are mathematically simplifying assumptions, which steps are supposed to correspond to empirically discovered physical laws, or even what all the words are supposed to mean.

Incidentally, Spivak gave an entertaining series of lectures on the subject of classical mechanics, whence

I haven't the slightest idea what any of this means! But I'm almost certain that it amounts to the similarity argument we have given. Aren't you glad that you aren't a mathematician of the 17th century!?

share|cite|improve this answer

This isn't so much a serious mathematical paper, but Miles Reid - Undergraduate Algebraic Geometry is full of bizarre sentences:

If $I(X)$ is defined as the set of functions vanishing at all points of $X$, then for any point of $X$, all functions of $I(X)$ vanish at it. And indeed conversely, if not more so, just as I was about to say myself, Piglet.


The name of the theorem (Nullstelle = zero of a polynomial + Satz = theorem) should help to remind you of the content (but stick to the German if you don't want to be considered an ignorant peasant.

share|cite|improve this answer
Miles Reid is an extraordinarily entertaining speaker. I heard him once call a theorem "Ice-cream of Tuesday" in a talk. More amazing still was that this was indeed a good, descriptive name, for the theorem! – Daniel Moskovich Feb 3 '11 at 22:47

From the ground-breaking paper: On the complexity of omega-automata by Muli Safra

alt text alt text


The author thanks his advisor, Amir Pnueli, for his encouragement and many fruitful discussions on this research.

Moshe Vardi initiated this research by a most illuminating mini-course on ω-automata he presented at the Weizmann Institute. He suggested the problems and helped in clarifying the solutions. Without him the work would not have started, progressed or ended.

Indispensable was the help of Rafi Heiman, whose signature at the bottom of a proof is more valuable than a Q.E.D.

Noam Nisan helped in the complexity evaluation of the determination construction.

Which leaves open the question of what is the author's contribution to the paper.

share|cite|improve this answer
+2 ! while almost all answers made me smile, this literally made my day! – vaxquis Dec 6 '14 at 15:13

While this is not necessarily the meaning of "colorful" intended by the OP, there is probably no better way to find out what motivated the editors of the American Mathematical Monthly to reiterate a damnation by publishing the following erratum, than posting it here:

Erratum: In the article, "On the Ph.D. in Mathematics," by I. N. Herstein, on page 821, line 26, of the August-September 1969 issue of the Monthly, please read "damn" instead of "darn."

American Mathematical Monthly volume 77 (1970) p. 78

share|cite|improve this answer
I couldn't possibly know, but my suspicion would be that a copyeditor bowdlerized the article without the author's knowledge or permission, and that the author, upon finding out, complained strongly enough for the magazine to give in and publish the correction. – Ilmari Karonen Aug 29 '11 at 13:52
Ah, that makes a lot of sense. – darij grinberg Aug 29 '11 at 19:24

Frank Adams was notorious for slipping little gems of humour into his paper and books. For instance, from his book, "Infinite Loop Spaces,"

(p. 128)

The reader may expect me to say something about "double coset fomulae." I shall indeed; I advise you to avoid them.

(p. 131)

Of course, this still leaves the question: what do you say to the algebraist who loves double cosets and insists that this is the same thing really? I suggest that you smile politely and say that you are maximizing your chance of finding a helpful and congenial interpretation of the double cosets. There is no need to say that the best interpretation is one which allows you to avoid mentioning the (expletive deleted) things at all.

For further entertainment, look at the entry [85] in the bibliograph, and look at "jokes" in the index.

share|cite|improve this answer
Did you use (expletive deleted) for "damn", or was it rather more colorful? – Harry Gindi Apr 23 '10 at 22:16
Harry, it's here… and the text itself has (expletive deleted) – Charles Siegel Apr 24 '10 at 0:58
Yes, I disagree with Adams about double cosets. Then again the colourful stories about him that came out after he died seemed to me to indicate that I disagreed with him about a number of things (for example the merits of attacking people with axes) – Kevin Buzzard Apr 24 '10 at 8:13
@Kevin: Hmm, I don't know which side of the axe issue you stand on. You know what -- it'll come up eventually. Why don't you surprise me? – Pete L. Clark Apr 24 '10 at 15:23
I hope this is not seen as mean-spirited, but some years ago, once when I mentioned Adams over coffee (probably in the context of his Lie Groups book) someone asked if I'd heard the joke about the "unstable Adams spectral sequence". (It tickled my fancy; everyone else went back to talking about traffic or football.) – Yemon Choi Apr 25 '10 at 0:54

A famous Sherlock Holmes meta-mystery is the identity of the giant rat of Sumatra. In The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire, Sherlock Holmes declares to Dr. Watson:

Matilda Briggs was not the name of a young woman, Watson, . . . It was a ship which is associated with the giant rat of Sumatra, a story for which the world is not yet prepared.

Sherlock Holmes fans have tried to figure out what the Giant Rat of Sumatra is, and how it might be related to a ship.
The solution to this greatest of all Sherlock Holmes mysteries is to be found in a mathematics book- one whose topic is Catastrophe Theory. On Page 196 of Curves and Singularities by J.W. Bruce and P.J. Giblin, we learn that the giant rat of Sumatra is in fact the family of functions $f_a(t_1,t_2)=t_1t_2(t_1-t_2)(t_1-at_2)$. Section 11.2 (Pages 196-200) of the book explains how we have established that this is indeed the giant rat of Sumatra, and elucidates why indeed the world is not yet prepared for its story. The relationship between the giant rat and the Matilda Briggs is not discussed, although we are led to suspect the worst, given that Catastrophe Theory is the book's theme.

share|cite|improve this answer

I don't even know if this is intentional or not. In his book Teichmuller theory, John Hubbard frequently references the category of Banach Analytic Manifolds. He adheres to the convention that a category be referenced by the concatenation of the first three letters of each constituent word, making the category in question BanAnaMan. This still cracks me up to this day.

share|cite|improve this answer
Heh. I am sure this was discovered by coincidence and kept by design. – Yemon Choi Apr 25 '10 at 0:49
Greg, I've just had a look at Hubbard's Teichmüller Theory, and a wonderful book it is. But, alas, I think your memory has deceived you, because his abbreviation for the category of Banach analytic manifolds (page 165) is in fact BanMan. – John Stillwell Mar 28 '11 at 23:31
Hmm, since my observation came from a course with Prof. Hubbard using a preprint of the book, I guess he changed it before publication. Thats a little disappointing. – Greg Muller Mar 29 '11 at 16:27
It has belatedly struck me that there should really be a contravariant equivalence of categories between Ban(Ana)Man and some category of algebraic objects, which could be abbreviated to ERIC. – Yemon Choi Aug 23 '11 at 0:56
Do you know that all three parts of BanAnaMan means "I" (Me) in Turkish, Arabic and Persian, respectively? – M. Shahryari Mar 10 '14 at 17:17

Diaconis and Efron wrote a paper "Testing for Independence in a Two-Way Table: New Interpretations of the Chi-Square Statistic" that was followed by 10 papers discussing their suggestion. The following is from Diaconis and Efron's rejoiner:

alt text

The critical paper that they refer to starts with a speldid colorful language:

alt text

Update: This is an additional answer too good to be missed. textareaalt text

share|cite|improve this answer

According to, page 181 in Chandler Davis' "An extremum problem for plane convex curves" (in Victor L. Klee's "Convexity", Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, American Mathematical Society, 1963), one has

"Research supported in part by the Federal Prison System. Opinions expressed in this paper are the author's and are not necessarily those of the Bureau of Prisons."

The paper was written while its author was in prison for refusing to cooperate with the House Unamerican Activities Committee.

The quote can be seen in Google books.

share|cite|improve this answer
I wonder if this was a joke or if it was required by the BoP, just as some funding agencies require a similar note. – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Oct 21 '10 at 13:46

How come no-one has mentioned Bloch's review of Milne's "Étale cohomology" yet?

locked by François G. Dorais Dec 18 '11 at 20:37
The whole review is a must-read... – darij grinberg Dec 5 '11 at 5:03
I would like to upvote this for being outrageous, but that would be giving it praise it does not deserve. – Ryan Reich Dec 12 '11 at 22:41
Right...thanks, but I doubt I'd have any more fun reading the review than I did reading that quote. – Elizabeth S. Q. Goodman Dec 13 '11 at 4:47
I am a bit shocked that something like this was printed in BAMS as late as in the earlier 80s. – user9072 Dec 17 '11 at 13:09
It may well be colourful; it strikes me as crass. – Yemon Choi Dec 18 '11 at 3:22

There is the following apochryphal dedication of a doctoral thesis:

"I am deeply grateful to Professor X, whose wrong conjectures and fallacious proofs led me to the theorems he had overlooked."

In fact this is a description of excellent supervision, in giving confidence to a student!

share|cite|improve this answer
@Yemon: It is told of Pontrjagin that his students gradually realised he had already solved the suggested problem , and this was very offputting. The image of "line manager" is false. A supervisor can suggest a good area in which the student might make some progress, and also to show by example how to cope with failure. "In research, the secret of success is the successful management of failure!" Also, one key question is after failure:"Why did I think this might be a good idea?" Others are: "What are the fall back positions? What are the fall forward positions?" How to manage risk? – Ronnie Brown Nov 4 '12 at 11:00

From page 329 of Carothers' Real Analysis textbook, where uses Fatou's lemma to prove Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem: "Now we unleash Fatou!"

share|cite|improve this answer

Chang and Keisler's book on Model Theory is dedicated to all those model theorists who have never dedicated a book to themselves.

share|cite|improve this answer
Or that they have dedicated some other book to themselves (perhaps secretly?) – Will Sawin Jan 9 '12 at 23:07

I am rather fond of Sylvester's "Aspiring to these wide generalizations, the analysis of quadratic functions soars to a pitch from whence it may look proudly down on the feeble and vain attempts of geometry proper to rise to its level or to emulate it in its flights." (1850)

share|cite|improve this answer

Jeremy Avigad in Computability and Incompleteness (2002)

... in a sense,computability is similar to the Supreme Court Justice Stewart's characterization of pornography, it may be hard to define precisely, but I know it when I see it."

Not quite from a 'paper' but floating around in the net:

"Who has not been amazed to learn that the function $y = e^x$, like a phoenix rising from its own ashes, is its own derivative?" -- Francois le Lionnais

share|cite|improve this answer

Here is a colorful rejoinder by D. Zagier (in his reprinted article on the dilogarithm) to colorful language by Ph. Elbaz-Vincent and H. Gangl:

[Ph. Elbaz-Vincent and H. Gangl] called these functions "polyanalogs," an amalgam of the words "analogue," "polylog," and "pollyanna" (an American term suggesting exaggerated or unwarranted optimism). Presumably the correct term for the case $m=2$ would then be "dianalog," which has a pleasing British flavo(u)r.

share|cite|improve this answer

In a paper of F.A.Muller — Sets, Classes and Categories — Solomon Feferman is cited:

I realise that workers in category-theory are so at home in their subject that they find it more natural to think in category-theoretic rather than set-theoretical terms, but I would liken this to not needing to hear once one has learned to compose music.

Colin McLarty in Learning from Questions on Categorical Foundations does mention this, too.

[Feferman 1977] S., 'Categorical Foundations and Foundations of Category Theory', in Logic, Foundations fo Mathematics and Computability Theory, R.E. Butts & J. Hintikka (eds.), Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1977; pp.149-169

share|cite|improve this answer
I confess to such an 'ailment'. But a lot of my work is internal to categories other than Set, so I have no choice, really... – David Roberts Aug 28 '11 at 22:39
@David: Please don't feel offended, it's about colorful language, not about category theory. – Hans Stricker Aug 28 '11 at 23:07
Still, Feferman is quite mistaken, I believe. Categorists, like other mathematicians, won't hesitate to think in set-theoretic terms if that is what works best in a given situation. – Todd Trimble Dec 13 '11 at 6:41

In Jacquet and Langlands' "Automorphic forms on GL(2)", page 154, they discuss a construction which uses some choices of intermediate objects -- of course the question whether the final result depends on those choices comes up ; here is how they treat it :

We prefer to pretend that the difficulty does not exist. As a matter of fact for anyone lucky enough not to have been indoctrinated in the functorial point of view it doesn’t.

That made me chuckle.

share|cite|improve this answer

At the end of the introduction to Spin Glasses: a challenge for mathematicians, Michel Talagrand writes:

It is customary for authors, at the end of an introduction, to warmly thank their spouse for having granted them the peaceful time needed to complete their work. I find that these thanks are far too universal and overly enthusiastic to be believable. Yet, I must say that in the present case even what would sound for the reader as exaggerated thanks would not truly reflect the extraordinary privileges I have enjoyed. Be jealous, reader, for I yet have to hear the words I dread the most: "Now is not the time to work".

share|cite|improve this answer

From the introduction of Model Theory by Wilfrid Hodges:

"Finally a dedication. If this book is a success, I dedicate it to my students and colleagues, past and present, in the field of logic. Many of them appear in the pages which follow; but of those who don't, let me mention here two thoughtful and generous souls, Geoffrey Kneebone and Chris Fernau, both now retired, who ran the logic group of London University at Bedford College when I first came to London. If the book is not a success, I dedicate it to the burglars in Boulder, Colorado, who broke into our house and stole a television, two typewriters, my wife Helen's engagement ring and several pieces of cheese, somewhere about a third of the way through Chapter 8."

share|cite|improve this answer
How a television, two typewriters, a ring and several pieces of cheese got into Chapter 8, I'll never know. Sorry, just found myself channelling Groucho Marx for a minute there. – Gerry Myerson Aug 4 '11 at 5:48

Sorry for blowing my own horn: if you read both French and English, you will probably appreciate the title of section 4 in

share|cite|improve this answer
In French, Jolissaint is pronounced as "joli seins", which translates as "nice tits" in English. – ACL Aug 23 '11 at 6:44

According to the book "King of Infinite Space" Coxeter, "tickled his readers with unexpected turns of phrase such as":

... dividing the product of the first three expressions by the product of the last two, and indulging in a veritable orgy of cancellation, we obtain ...

share|cite|improve this answer

A gem of R.H. Bing:

Dimension 4 is the most difficult dimension. It is too old to spank, the way we might deal with the little dimensions 1, 2, and 3; but it is also too young to reason with, the way we deal with the grown-up dimensions 5 and higher.

Source here:

share|cite|improve this answer
As an aside, I discovered by experience that searching for "Bing too old to spank" is NOT a good way to find a source for this quote. – Dave Futer Jul 5 '11 at 14:24

the book "Combinatorial optimization: algorithms and complexity" by Christos H. Papadimitriou, Kenneth Steiglitz contains the following exercise (19, pg 380):

The following is from the New York Times of November 27, 1979. Determine, when possible, whether each statement is (a) true, (b) false, (c) misleading, (d) equivalent to a well-known conjecture, the solution of which was probably not known to Mr. Browne.

alt text

share|cite|improve this answer

The following is taken from The paper "Rational points near curves and small nonzero $|x^3-y^2|$ via lattice" by Noam Elkies It was discussed in a previous MO question.

Citing the Simpsons is rather surprising and I wonder what is the story behind it.

alt text

share|cite|improve this answer
According to "The writers also use the newsgroup to test how observant the fans are. In the seventh season episode "Treehouse of Horror VI", the writer of segment Homer3, David S. Cohen, deliberately inserted a false equation into the background of one scene. The equation that appears is $1782^{12} + 1841^{12} = 1922^{12}$." – Gerry Myerson Apr 7 '11 at 7:25

The AMS Memoirs 947 "Rock Blocks" by Will Turner is full of colorful lanuage. For example in the introduction one finds out that:

"Hannah Turner supported me financially (partly), and libidinously (entirely)."


"We choose not to spend time chomping on this old pie, since we have become aware of dishes with a more exotic, and alluring aroma."

and so on....

share|cite|improve this answer
TMI, Will Turner. – Todd Trimble Mar 25 '14 at 12:19

protected by François G. Dorais Oct 15 '13 at 2:42

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site.

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.