| I used the example of your ANS algorithm precisely because I think it's such a great contribution to the entire field of computer science, and really wanted to understand it. If you weren't on the other side of the planet from me, I'd offer to buy you a beer to say thanks for making my phone faster! https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/4oie88/apple_h... (And I think companies like Apple owe you a lot more than just a beer.) My point is just that people learn in different ways, and often many different approaches need to be available so to that everyone can have that ah-ha moment. The diagram in your paper didn't work for me, and it was just frustrating that everyone else who did understand the algorithm just copy-pasted the diagram instead of re-framing the concept with new terminology or a different diagram. Speaking of physics and the difficulty of understanding other physicists, I think the PDF you linked to is perfectly illustrative of the style of diagramming that doesn't "work for me". Too busy, many colours without apparent meaning, packing too much into one sheet, etc... FYI, one of the smartest people I've ever met had the same style. I don't want to call it a mental illness, because it's more a "style of genius", but it's interesting that it's definitely a "recognisable trait" that some people have or don't have, like blue or brown eyes. PS: I've been poking away at a TOE myself for over a decade, and my approach has been curiously similar to yours, also based on a "particles are topological quantities" concept. |