|
|
|
|
|
by tpoacher
1381 days ago
|
|
I never implied that the obfuscation comes from having to present the maths. Clarity and rigour are orthogonal concepts. In fact, the reverse is often the case: make the derivations comprehensive and easy enough to follow, and the reader will feel it was an obvious result. The argument here is that occasionally you should jump from A to C, skipping B (in the paper, not in your own work!), such that the reader will have to work that extra step to reach C from A, to make them appreciate more that the insight "A leads to C" was not a trivial one (and thus "not novel"). |
|