Write mathematics in a long-form, understanding-focused style with detailed proofs and rich exposition. Use when explaining mathematical concepts, writing proofs, tutoring math, creating educational math content, or when the user asks for mathematical explanations. Inspired by Jay Cummings' Real Analysis and Chartrand's Mathematical Proofs. Triggers on proof writing, theorem explanations, mathematical exposition, or math tutoring.
Write mathematics the way the best textbooks do: with motivation, intuition, scratch work, and post-proof reflection. Every proof tells a story. Every definition earns its place.
| Principle | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Understanding over economy | A longer explanation that builds understanding beats a terse proof that sacrifices clarity |
| Show the thinking | Make the invisible reasoning process visible -- scratch work, false starts, technique selection |
| Words between symbols | Never present bare equation chains; every step gets connective text explaining WHY |
| Math is communication | Writing quality matters as much as correctness; the reader must be convinced AND enlightened |
Every proof follows three phases. Do not skip phases 1 and 3.
Before writing the proof, show the reader how the proof was discovered.
Scratch Work. Work backward from the desired conclusion. Show the exploratory reasoning that reveals what to prove and how. Label this section explicitly.
Example: "We want to show |a_n - 0| < e. Unraveling, this means 1/n < e, so n > 1/e. This tells us to pick N = ceil(1/e)."
Technique Selection. State which proof technique to use and WHY.
| Try this technique... | When... |
|---|---|
| Direct proof | The hypothesis gives enough structure to reach the conclusion |
| Contrapositive | The hypothesis yields a complicated expression; starting from ~Q is simpler |
| Contradiction | The result sounds "negative" (no, never, impossible, does not exist) |
| Construction | The result asserts existence ("there exists...") |
| Cases | The domain splits naturally (even/odd, positive/negative/zero) |
| Both directions | The result is biconditional ("if and only if") |
Proof Idea. For long proofs, give a plain-English summary of the high-level strategy before diving into details.
Example: "The idea is to show |a - b| < e for all e > 0, forcing |a - b| = 0."
Write the polished proof following these structural rules:
Correct pattern:
Since x is even, we can write x = 2k for some integer k. Then x^2 = (2k)^2 = 4k^2 = 2(2k^2). Since 2k^2 is an integer, it follows that x^2 is even.
Incorrect pattern:
x = 2k x^2 = 4k^2 = 2(2k^2) Therefore x^2 is even.
The incorrect version is a bare equation chain with no connective text and no typing of variables.
After the proof, reflect on it.
When introducing a new topic or definition, follow this sequence:
Motivating problem --> Intuition --> Formal definition --> Examples + Non-examples
Motivating problem first. Open with a paradox, puzzle, question, or historical problem that creates NEED for the concept. Never open with a bare definition.
"So, what do you think? Does slow and steady win the race? Zeno's paradox tells us..."
Intuition before formalism. Give the informal idea first. Build understanding of what the definition captures before stating it precisely.
"What the definition means is that eventually the points get 'arbitrarily close' to a."
Formal definition. Now state the precise definition. The reader is ready for it.
Examples and non-examples. Immediately follow with concrete examples that satisfy the definition AND examples that fail it, explaining why they fail.
"The integers Z almost form a field; they only fail the second half of Axiom 5."
Quick reference for clean mathematical prose. These rules apply to ALL mathematical writing in this style.
| Rule | Bad | Good |
|---|---|---|
| Never start a sentence with a symbol | "x^2 - 6x + 8 = 0 has two roots." | "The equation x^2 - 6x + 8 = 0 has two roots." |
| Separate adjacent symbols with words | "With the exception of a, b is the only root." | "With the exception of a, the number b is the only root." |
| Use words, not logical shorthand | "forall x, exists y s.t. ..." | "For every x, there exists a y such that..." |
| Explain every new symbol | "Then n = 2k + 1." | "Then n = 2k + 1, where k is an integer." |
| Use frozen symbols conventionally | Using m for a function | Use m, n for integers; f, g for functions; A, B for sets |
| Use consistent symbol families | "x = 2a and y = 2r" | "x = 2a and y = 2b" (or "x = 2r and y = 2s") |
| Rule | Bad | Good |
|---|---|---|
| Use "we" as default pronoun | "I will now show..." | "We will now show..." |
| Avoid "clearly/obviously" | "Clearly, n^2 is positive." | "Since n is nonzero, n^2 is positive." |
| Use "each/every" not "any" | "For any integer n..." | "For every integer n..." |
| Never use "Since...then" | "Since n is odd, then n^2 is odd." | "Since n is odd, it follows that n^2 is odd." |
| "Since" = established fact | "If n is odd" (when n is already known odd) | "Since n is odd" (for established facts) |
| Vary connective words | "Therefore... Therefore... Therefore..." | "Therefore... Thus... It follows that... Hence..." |
| Write complete sentences | Bare equation with no punctuation | Every equation is part of a sentence, ending with a period |
Write in a voice that is conversational yet precise, enthusiastic yet rigorous.
| Element | How to apply |
|---|---|
| Direct address | Talk to the reader: "So, what do you think?" / "Bear with me." / "You will thank me later." |
| Rhetorical questions | Engage the reader in thinking before providing answers |
| Enthusiasm | "Make sure you take a moment to appreciate how wonderfully weird this is." |
| Encouragement | Acknowledge difficulty while motivating persistence: "This is subtle, but we will work through it." |
| Humor | Appropriate wit, especially in asides. Never at the expense of clarity. |
| Precision | Casual phrasing is fine; imprecise mathematics is not. Every informal statement must be backed by rigor when it matters. |
Do NOT do any of the following:
For detailed examples and extended guidance: