|
|
|
|
|
|
by Smaug123
2156 days ago
|
|
|
Look, do you really want me to wade through sixteen pages to discover the notation first (written by someone who doesn't know about \langle and \rangle, either)? I would consider it bad argumentative form of the same water as Euler's apocryphal "does God exist" debate with Diderot. At the very least, you will struggle to persuade me that the use of \wedge is easier to understand than the English word "and" with line breaks. Also you've picked a specific example where the objects of study are these long strings of symbols. Of course any paper worth its salt is going to use them - they're literally the things that the paper is there to examine. It's the metamathematical statements in this context, not the quotation of the formulas under study, that I want to replace with English. |
|
|
No - just pointing out that no matter how hard you studied that an English equivalent of such a terse expression will be a mess, vastly harder to understand.
>At the very least, you will struggle to persuade me that the use of \wedge is easier to understand than the English word "and" with line breaks.
You're making my case for me :)
The word "and" and "or" are ambiguous in common English, and have no common or even technical well-defined precedence. "Or" in English both can mean "inclusive or" or "exclusive or," yet most people simple write "or".
In math they have well defined precedence, and math has parentheses to order correctly, unlike English.
The only reason you find English easier to understand is you have used more than math symbols at a ratio that makes that true for you. It's not true for everyone, especially professionals, that use some set of notation a lot.
>Also you've picked a specific example where the objects of study are these long strings of symbols
Avoiding the point. The math does not have to self-referential to use complex expressions not amenable to writing in English. This expression is not complex because it's a meta argument. Such expressions can occur in all sorts of places.
At this point I'm sure your present these red herrings to avoid considering that your opinion is not common among professionals that can read symbols much faster and more accurately than can be done in English.
No sense in continuing.