Failed to comprehend which subject, linear algebra? I would argue no, and other people who are more on the pure mathematics side would agree [0][1].
snicker7 said it very succinctly:
> However, in mathematics proper, it is absolutely the case that linear algebra is about linear transformations. Indeed, this is the only interpretation that remains meaningful when trying to generalize (e.g. to functional analysis / multilinear algebra).
If you're point is that I failed to comprehend matrices, then I don't think you have enough data to make that claim since I don't really talk about matrices. I kind of address that in my other comment [2].
I don't follow your point around "a wide array of problems and models are the same thing". That's a very vague general statement that I certainly comprehend (not sure how you inferred otherwise). Specifically, I don't see how that point relates at all to the claim I made about linear algebra.
snicker7 said it very succinctly:
> However, in mathematics proper, it is absolutely the case that linear algebra is about linear transformations. Indeed, this is the only interpretation that remains meaningful when trying to generalize (e.g. to functional analysis / multilinear algebra).
If you're point is that I failed to comprehend matrices, then I don't think you have enough data to make that claim since I don't really talk about matrices. I kind of address that in my other comment [2].
I don't follow your point around "a wide array of problems and models are the same thing". That's a very vague general statement that I certainly comprehend (not sure how you inferred otherwise). Specifically, I don't see how that point relates at all to the claim I made about linear algebra.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22419018
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22417764
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22417595