** (2009), 525–531.

N. H. Kuiper. *On conformally-flat spaces in the large.* Ann of Math*.* **50** (1949), 916–924.

P. Lax. Functional analysis. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2002.

J. M. Lee and T. H. Parker. *The Yamabe problem*. Bull AMS. **17** (1987), no. 1, 37–91.

S. Paneitz. A quartic conformally covariant differential operator for arbitrary pseudo-Riemannian manifolds. Preprint (1983).

J. Qing and D. Raske. *On positive solutions to semilinear conformally invariant equations on locally conformally flat manifolds*. Int Math Res Not. Art. id 94172 (2006).
 ---
author:
- |
    [**Cristian S. Calude**]{}$^{1}$,  [**Elena Calude**]{}$^{2}$, [**Solomon Marcus**]{}$^{3}$\
    $^{1}$University of Auckland, New Zealand\
    [cristian@cs.auckland.ac.nz]{}\
    $^{2}$Massey University at Albany, New Zealand\
    [e.calude@massey.ac.nz]{}\
    $^{3}$Romanian Academy, Mathematics, Bucharest, Romania\
    [Solomon.Marcus@imar.ro]{}
title: '**Passages of Proof**'
---

To Prove or Not to Prove–That Is the Question!
==============================================

\
\
\
\

In this paper we propose a new perspective on the evolution and history of the idea of mathematical proof. Proofs will be studied at three levels: syntactical, semantical and pragmatical. Computer-assisted proofs will be give a special attention. Finally, in a highly speculative part, we will anticipate the evolution of proofs under the assumption that the quantum computer will materialize. We will argue that there is little ‘intrinsic’ difference between traditional and ‘unconventional’ types of proofs.

Mathematical Proofs: An Evolution in Eight Stages
=================================================

[*Reason*]{} and [*experiment*]{} are two ways to acquire knowledge. For a long time mathematical proofs required only reason; this might be no longer true. We can distinguish eight periods in
* * (2009), 525–531. 

 N. H. Kuiper. * On conformally - flat spaces in the large. * Ann of Math *. * * * 50 * * (1949), 916–924. 

 P. Lax. Functional psychoanalysis. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2002. 

 J. M. Lee and T. H. Parker. * The Yamabe trouble *. Bull AMS. * * 17 * * (1987), no. 1, 37–91. 

 S. Paneitz. A quartic conformally covariant differential hustler for arbitrary pseudo - Riemannian manifolds. Preprint (1983). 

 J. Qing and D. Raske. * On positive solutions to semilinear conformally changeless equations on locally conformally flat manifolds *. Int Math Res Not. artwork. i d 94172 (2006). 
  --- 
 generator: 
 - | 
     [ * * Cristian S. Calude**]{}$^{1}$,   [ * * Elena Calude**]{}$^{2}$, [ * * Solomon Marcus**]{}$^{3}$\ 
     $ ^{1}$University of Auckland, New Zealand\ 
     [ cristian@cs.auckland.ac.nz]{}\ 
     $ ^{2}$Massey University at Albany, New Zealand\ 
     [ e.calude@massey.ac.nz]{}\ 
     $ ^{3}$Romanian Academy, Mathematics, Bucharest, Romania\ 
     [ Solomon.Marcus@imar.ro ] { } 
 title:' * * passing of Proof * *' 
 --- 

 To Prove or Not to Prove – That Is the motion! 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 \ 
 \ 
 \ 
 \ 

 In this paper we propose a raw position on the evolution and history of the idea of numerical proof. proof will be studied at three levels: syntactical, semantical and pragmatical. calculator - assisted proofs will be afford a special care. Finally, in a highly notional part, we will anticipate the evolution of proof under the assumption that the quantum computer will materialize. We will argue that there is little ‘ intrinsic ’ remainder between traditional and ‘ unconventional ’ types of proofs. 

 Mathematical Proofs: An Evolution in Eight Stages 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 [ * Reason * ] { } and [ * experiment * ] { } are two ways to acquire knowledge. For a long time numerical proof required alone rationality; this might be no longer true. We can distinguish eight periods in
** (2009), 525–531.

N. H. Kuiper. *On conformally-nlat spaces in tkw largx.* Ann or Math*.* **50** (1949), 916–924.

P. Lax. Functional analysis. Jlhb Wiltj & Sons, Inc. 2002.

J. M. Lee avd T. H. Pagker. *The Tamaue problem*. Bull EJS. **17** (1987), no. 1, 37–91.

S. Pahcitz. C wuartic conforkally covasiant differendixl operator for arbitrary pseudo-Riemagnian msnlfolds. Preprinj (1983).

J. Qpnd ans D. Raske. *On positive solutions to semiliiear conformallu invariant equations on llcalpy conformally flah manifolds*. Int Nath Res Not. Art. id 94172 (2006).
 ---
author:
- |
    [**Ctistian S. Calude**]{}$^{1}$,  [**Elena Calude**]{}$^{2}$, [**Souomon Marcus**]{}$^{3}$\
    $^{1}$Ubivftsity of Aucjland, New Zealand\
    [crisdian@cs.aickland.ac.nz]{}\
    $^{2}$Mavset University at Albanb, New Zealand\
    [e.cajude@massef.ae.nz]{}\
    $^{3}$Romanian Acadeny, Mathgmatiws, Bjxhafesu, Rpmznia\
    [Sklomon.Marchs@imar.ro]{}
titoe: '**Passages of Proog**'
---

Tj Prove or Not to Prjvq–That Is the Question!
==============================================

\
\
\
\

In this paper we pgopoae a new perspective on the evolution and hidtory of ehe idea of mathematical proof. Proofs will be stugied et thxcc lexwld: syntactical, semantical and pragmatical. Comptfet-axsisted proofs will be gife a fpecial attenjion. Fiuzlmy, in a highly spefulativg part, we will wntivipate the evolution of proifs under thv aswumption that the euantum com'uter eill katerialize. We will argbe thaf there is pittle ‘inffinsic’ differencd bvtwean tradiukonal and ‘unconvegtional’ tbpes pf proows.

Majhematisal Proofs: An Eymlution in Eight Shages
=================================================

[*Teason*]{} and [*experlment*]{} are two ways to acquire kipwledge. For s nonc time mcthemabical proofs rezuired only recson; thif migft be no lknger tcue. We can dystinguish eicjt periods ii
** (2009), 525–531. N. H. Kuiper. *On in large.* Ann Math*.* **50** (1949), John & Sons, Inc. J. M. Lee T. H. Parker. *The Yamabe problem*. AMS. **17** (1987), no. 1, 37–91. S. Paneitz. A quartic conformally covariant differential for arbitrary pseudo-Riemannian manifolds. Preprint (1983). J. Qing and D. Raske. *On positive to conformally equations locally conformally flat manifolds*. Int Math Res Not. Art. id 94172 (2006). --- author: - | S. Calude**]{}$^{1}$, [**Elena Calude**]{}$^{2}$, [**Solomon Marcus**]{}$^{3}$\ $^{1}$University of New Zealand\ [cristian@cs.auckland.ac.nz]{}\ $^{2}$Massey at Albany, New Zealand\ [e.calude@massey.ac.nz]{}\ Academy, Bucharest, Romania\ title: of --- To Prove Not to Prove–That Is the Question! ============================================== \ \ \ \ In this paper we propose a perspective on and history the of proof. Proofs will at three levels: syntactical, semantical and will be give a special attention. Finally, in highly speculative we will anticipate the evolution of under the assumption that the quantum computer will We will argue that there is little ‘intrinsic’ difference between traditional and ‘unconventional’ types of Proofs: An Evolution in Stages ================================================= [*Reason*]{} [*experiment*]{} two to knowledge. For long time mathematical proofs required only reason; this might be no true. We can distinguish eight periods in
** (2009), 525–531.

N. H. Kuiper. *On conformally-flat Spaces in thE largE.* AnN of maTh*.* **50** (1949), 916–924.

P. LAx. FuNctional analysIS. JohN Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2002.

J. M. Lee and T. h. ParkEr. *tHe YaMAbE probLem*. Bull amS. **17** (1987), NO. 1, 37–91.

s. PaNeItZ. A qUaRTiC confOrmAlly covAriant diffEreNtIal operator fOR aRbitrary psEudO-Riemannian mAniFolds. PRePriNT (1983).

J. QinG anD D. RasKe. *On poSItive sOlutions tO sEMilineAR conforMALlY invAriant equations on LOcALly conformally Flat maNiFOlDS*. int matH Res Not. Art. Id 94172 (2006).
 ---
AuthoR:
- |
    [**cristiaN s. CALUDe**]{}$^{1}$,  [**ELEna Calude**]{}$^{2}$, [**SoloMon Marcus**]{}$^{3}$\
    $^{1}$UnIVerSity of auCklANd, New ZEalanD\
    [cRIstIan@cs.aucklaNd.ac.Nz]{}\
    $^{2}$Massey UNiversITy at AlbANy, New ZeAland\
    [e.CalUde@MassEY.aC.nZ]{}\
    $^{3}$RoMaNIan aCaDemY, matHematics, buChArest, romaNIA\
    [sOlomOn.MArcuS@imar.Ro]{}
title: '**PassagEs oF ProOF**'
---

To prove Or Not To PrOvE–That is the QUestiOn!
==============================================

\
\
\
\

in this paper we prOposE a new persPecTiVe oN tHe evoLUtion aNd hIstOry of thE idea of MAthEmATICaL proof. Proofs will be StUDIeD at three Levels: SYnTaCTical, semAnTicAl anD PRagmaTicaL. coMputer-asSisted PRoOfS will be GiVe a speCiAl aTteNtion. fInalLy, in a hIghly speCulatIVe part, we will anTIcipate the evoLUtION oF ProoFs uNder the assuMptiON thaT the QUaNtuM CompuTer wiLl MAtERialize. We will argue tHaT there Is litTle ‘intrinsic’ dIfference bETWEen tradiTionAL aND ‘unconventionaL’ typeS of proofs.

MAThematicAl ProOfs: An EvoLution in EIGHt Stages
=================================================

[*reaSon*]{} And [*ExpERImEnt*]{} are two ways TO AcquIrE knowleDge. for a lonG tiMe mAthEmaTiCal proofs Required OnLy ReAsOn; tHis miGHt be no loNgEr tRuE. We Can diSTinguiSh eigHt peRiOdS In
** (2009), 525–531.

N. H.  Kuiper. * On co nfo rma ll y-fl at s paces in the l a rge. * Ann of Math*.* **50* * (19 49 ) , 91 6 –9 24.
P. Lax. Fu n c tio na lana ly s is . Joh n W iley &Sons, Inc.  20 02 .

J. M. Lee an d T. H. Pa rke r. *The Yama beproble m* . B u ll AM S.**17* * (198 7 ), no.  1, 37–91 .S. Pan e itz. Aq u ar ticconformally covar i an t  differentialoperat or fo r arb itr ary pseudo -R ieman n ian man i fo l d s . P r eprint (1983) .

J. Qinga ndD. Ras ke . * O n posi tiveso l uti ons to semi line ar confor mallyi nvarian t  equati ons on  lo cal ly c o nf or mal ly fla t  m ani f old s*. IntMa th  ResNot. A r t . id  94 172(2006 ).
 ---
autho r:- |  [**Cr istia n S.  C alude **]{}$ ^{1}$ , [**Elena Calud e**] {}$^{2}$,  [* *S olo mo n Mar c us**]{ }$^ {3} $\
   $^{1}$U n ive rs i t y  o f Auckland, New Ze al a n d\ 
    [cr istian @ cs .a u ckland.a c. nz] {}\  $^{ 2}$M a ss ey Unive rsitya tAl bany, N ew  Zeala nd \
  [e.ca l ude@ massey .ac.nz]{ }\
  $^{3}$Romania n  Academy, Mat h em a t ic s , Bu cha rest, Roman ia\   [ Solo m on .Ma r cus@i mar.r o] { }t itle: '**Passages o fProof* *'
-- -

To Prove o r Not to P r o v e–That I s th e  Q u estion!
====== ===== ========== = ======== ===== ======== ===

\
\\ \

In th ispap erwep r op ose a new per s p ecti ve  on the  ev olution  an d h ist ory  o f the ide a of mat he ma ti ca l p roof. Proofs w il l b estu dieda t thre e lev els:  s yn t act ical, s e ma n t ical  a nd  pra gma ti cal.Comp u ter -assist ed proofs  wi l l be  g iv e a spe cial attentio n.  Finally,in  ahighly s peculati ve part, we will antici p ate the  ev oluti on o f proofsund er the  as s umptio n that  thequ ant u m  comp u t er  wi ll  materiali z e . W e wil largu e thatthere is little ‘i n tri nsic’ differe nce  bet w e en  tr a di t ion al and ‘ unconventional’  types ofpr o of s.

Mathem a tic al  Proofs : An Ev oluti o n in Ei ght Stage s
======= == ==== = = === ========== ======== ========= = ===
[ *R eason *]{ } and[* exp erime nt*]{} are  twoways t oacquir e kno wl edge. Fo r a long time mathemati cal pr oofsreq uired onl y r e aso n; this m ight  be no lon ger  tr ue. W e c a n dis ting u is h e i ght p erio d s in
** (2009),_525–531.

N. H._Kuiper. *On conformally-flat spaces_in the_large.*_Ann of_Math*.*_**50** (1949), 916–924.

P._Lax. Functional analysis._John Wiley & Sons,_Inc. 2002.

J. M._Lee_and T. H. Parker. *The Yamabe problem*. Bull AMS. **17** (1987), no. 1, 37–91.

S._Paneitz._A quartic_conformally_covariant_differential operator for arbitrary pseudo-Riemannian_manifolds. Preprint (1983).

J. Qing and_D. Raske._*On positive solutions to semilinear conformally invariant equations_on_locally conformally flat_manifolds*. Int Math Res Not. Art. id 94172 (2006).
_---
author:
- |
    [**Cristian_S. Calude**]{}$^{1}$,  [**Elena_Calude**]{}$^{2}$,_[**Solomon_Marcus**]{}$^{3}$\
   _$^{1}$University of Auckland, New Zealand\
 _  [cristian@cs.auckland.ac.nz]{}\
   _$^{2}$Massey University at Albany, New Zealand\
 _  [e.calude@massey.ac.nz]{}\
   _$^{3}$Romanian Academy, Mathematics, Bucharest, Romania\
_ _ [Solomon.Marcus@imar.ro]{}
title: '**Passages of Proof**'
---

To_Prove or Not_to Prove–That_Is the Question!
==============================================

\
\
\
\

In_this paper we propose a new_perspective on the_evolution and history of the idea_of_mathematical proof. Proofs_will_be_studied at_three levels: syntactical,_semantical_and pragmatical._Computer-assisted_proofs will be give a special_attention._Finally, in a highly speculative part, we_will anticipate the evolution_of_proofs under the assumption_that the quantum computer will_materialize. We will argue that there_is little_‘intrinsic’ difference_between traditional and ‘unconventional’ types of proofs.

Mathematical Proofs: An Evolution in_Eight Stages
=================================================

[*Reason*]{} and [*experiment*]{} are two_ways to acquire knowledge._For a_long_time mathematical proofs_required_only reason;_this might be no longer true. We_can distinguish_eight periods in