Which are the deepest theorems with the most elementary proofs?
I give two examples:
i) Proof_of_the_Euler_product_formula_for_the_Riemann_zeta_function
ii) Proof that the halting problem is undecidable using diagonalization
Deepest theorems with simplest proofs
4
$\begingroup$
soft-question
elementary-number-theory
intuition
-
7@GM2001: If you edit this question any more, I will lock it, which will prevent further edits, comments, and answers. – 2011-10-26
2 Answers
9
These perhaps aren't particularly deep, but they are the first that come to mind.
-
0I think the linked proof in (1) is misnamed, and is not a proof by *infinite descent* (unlike [this one](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_descent#Irrationality_of_.E2.88.9A2)). – 2011-10-22
3
I think one should not confuse "important with "deep". The facts that $\sqrt{2}$ is irrational, that there is no surjective map $X\to2^X$, or that there are an infinity of primes, are certainly important or even "fundamental", but their proofs are so simple that one cannot call them "deep". A theorem is "deep" when its proof is really hard and, above all, requires a theory that transcends the realm the problem is formulated in. Consider, e.g., Gauss' theorem about which regular $n$-gons can be constructed with ruler and compass.
-
3To add on Srivatsan's comment, the proof of |P(X)|>|X| while seemingly trivial nowadays required the development of an entire new field in mathematics. I'd say this qualifies as pretty deep. – 2011-10-23