This is a pretty sensational piece, but there's fundamental truth in that what-a-proof-is is based on an individual's ability to understand it. This is just how

This is a pretty sensational piece, but there's fundamental truth in that what-a-proof-is is based on an individual's ability to understand it. This is just how all ideas work. In the end, you can then take a proof and make it empirical easily, and this (while not being anything like a proof) can be more convincing, because it's not tested by your understanding, but rather by your ability to observe... this also is fundamental to proof-by-contradiction, which convinces you simply by showing an example of a situation that doesn't work (and those disproves the assumption). I think there's a lot of criticism floating around here, but there's something fundamentally right about a proof being about communication. The truth the proof reveals is pretty much objective though.