Replies

Yes, but since we have a large volume of data, we can quantify the error.

HOW TO PROVE IT

proof by accumulated evidence:: Long and diligent search has not revealed a counterexample.
proof by example:: The author gives only the case n = 2 and suggests that it contains most of the ideas of the general proof.
proof by intimidation:: "Trivial."
proof by vigorous handwaving:: Works well in a classroom or seminar setting.
proof by cumbersome notation:: Best done with access to at least four alphabets and special symbols.
proof by exhaustion:: An issue or two of a journal devoted to your proof is useful.
proof by omission:: "The reader may easily supply the details"; "The other 253 cases are analogous"; "..."
proof by obfuscation:: A long plotless sequence of true and/or meaningless syntactically related statements.
proof by wishful citation:: The author cites the negation, converse, or generalization of a theorem from the literature to support his claims.
proof by funding:: How could three different government agencies be wrong?
proof by eminent authority:: "I saw Karp in the elevator and he said it was probably NP-complete."
proof by personal communication:: "Eight-dimensional colored cycle stripping is NP-complete [Karp, personal communication]."
proof by reduction to the wrong problem:: "To see that infinite-dimensional colored cycle stripping is decidable, we reduce it to the halting problem."
proof by reference to inaccessible literature:: The author cites a simple corollary of a theorem to be found in a privately circulated memoir of the Slovenian Philological Society, 1883.
proof by importance:: A large body of useful consequences all follow from the proposition in question.
proof by cosmology:: The negation of the proposition is unimaginable or meaningless. Popular for proofs of the existence of God.
proof by mutual reference:: In reference A, Theorem 5 is said to follow from Theorem 3 in reference B, which is shown to follow from Corollary 6.2 in reference C, which is an easy consequence of Theorem 5 in reference A.
proof by metaproof:: A method is given to construct the desired proof. The correctness of the method is proved by any of these techniques.
proof by picture:: A more convincing form of proof by example. Combines well with proof by omission.
proof by vehement assertion:: It is useful to have some kind of authority relation to the audience.
proof by ghost reference:: Nothing even remotely resembling the cited theorem appears in the reference given.
proof by forward reference:: Reference is usually to a forthcoming paper of the author, which is often not as forthcoming as at first.
proof by semantic shift:: Some of the standard but inconvenient definitions are changed for the statement of the result.
proof by appeal to intuition:: Cloud-shaped drawings frequently help here.