|
|
|
|
|
by dkural
238 days ago
|
|
It's good to remind yourself of Bill Thurston's points:
https://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1994-30-02/S0273-0979-1994... I love the analogy in David Bessis's wonderful book Mathematica (nothing to do with Wolfram). We all know how to tie our shoes. Now, write in words and symbols to teach someone how you tie your shoes. This is what a proof is. Often even people with STEM degrees confuse what mathematicians do with the visible product of it - symbols and words on a page. While the formalism of mathematics has immense value for precision, and provides a "serialization language" (to borrow a CS analogy), it would be akin to confusing a Toaster with the Toaster manual, or shoelaces with the instructions. |
|