[seanhunter]

There are lots of people who write math in a way that is very easy for others (of an appropriate level of experience let’s say) to understand. I also didn’t find this particularly hard to follow, although some of it is I think a little fast and loose. eg

   > In general, given two finite-dimensional vector spaces U and W, then U ≃ W exactly when dim(U)=dim(W).

Is that really true? I don’t think it is. Specifically surely at least they have to be vector spaces either over the same field or over fields which are themselves isomorphic. I’m thinking say U is a vector space over R and W is a vector space over Q. Dim(U) = Dim(W)=1 but U and W are not isomorphic because there exists no bijection between the reals and the rationals.

[LolWolf]

yes, definitely some of it is (purposefully) fast and loose, though (ideally!) mostly unambiguous with reasonable assumptions

I think that part should've been "vector subspaces" rather than vector spaces since that is how U and W are defined in the paragraph prior.

I'll add this as a note, thanks!

[seanhunter]

It’s a cool article. I love linear algebra, particularly in settings like the polynomials.

[LolWolf]

ha, thank you! it's very fun to write these

hopefully you also enjoy the next one which imo makes a fun connection between the linear algebraic CRT and the fourier transform :)