Mathfags will tell you with a straight face that symbols beat words.
>>108875620>work out a proof with careful steps>read over it>"yep looks good">erase half the steps>erase some more steps>publish it>it takes months to review because half the steps are missing>gets accepted>nobody understands it because half the step are missingwhy do they do this
>>108875620If you actually tried reading that I doubt you will have any trouble following it. Whereas if you wrote the same thing using only words it would be much more convoluted, confusing, and imprecise.
>>108875620Yes, problem?
>>108875620The artist formerly known as Prince would too
>>108875821Don't forget to rewrite all the function names to single letters from the ancient greek alphabet. Cause that makes perfect sense.
>>108875821those are definitions, not proofs.>>108875840KINO
>>108875823It would only be slightly more complex and the majority of that complexity could be hidden under a well named function or two.
>>108875852>those are definitions, not proofs.I was talking about mathematicians and not ops image
>>108875865In that case I kinda agree. People publish stuff sometimes that would be a lot easier to follow with just a little bit more explanation.
>>108875620Btw, did /g/ ever try to create a new math notation?Because you know, math is not really a science on it's own, it is a formal language. Language. Means you can replace it with another one, that does the same exact thing, but with completely different syntax.So you could make it more readable for humans, or computers or LLMs.
Face it even lamport gave in and wrote pluscal because mathematical notation is dogshit for nontrivial problems. If you are going to use the string 'x1,...,xk' 20 times you might as well just write xs
>>108875840Creationist chan...
>>108875840thats physics it makes perfect sense and is easy to understand whatever op posted is harder.
>>108875821I personally only publish a version of my proofs so you cant understand them unless you basically redo my entire studies and pretend like thats how it came out. It seems like that filters out midwits pretty well in comparison to the field of cs which seems to be almost exclusively made up of retards.
>>108875919>something isn't clear>writes "clearly"
>>108875821If it was hard to write, it should be hard to read
>>108875823Explain why this is worse without sounding mad.
>>108875840>God called the light "energy," and the darkness he [sic] called "matter." What translation is that? The vulgate, the LXX, the KJV and some others I checked all said that light is called Day and darkness is called night. The rest I didn't bother to check.
>>108875991This seems word for word the same as the op image, just using the top 2 definitions. Did you read either of them?
>>108875991This is objectively bad. Seems like another retarded mathematician was allowed to invent the notation. They clearly should not be allowed to do that.Also nta, I'm >>108875887
>>108876121>definition is word for word the same>just using different defintionsDefine same and different, I believe you may be negative IQ. >>108876124Correct, because nobody has done the ground work to put semantics on the operations of RFT
>>108875823Right. The point of mathematical language is to be concise and precise.>>108875882Pure math nerds lose touch with normal human interaction, more than any other field except perhaps theoretical physics
>>108876121The object it defines is the same the definition is different, but uses the same structure.
mathfags are irrelevant in 2026 and most of them are working at a fast food restaurant. all modern math is done with coding and all of their gay little symbols can be expressed in english and 8th grade algebra using code.
>>108875620Symbols make sense if you know the meaning of the symbols.Its okay to be a midwit.
>>108876141using different notation I should have said. if you substituted \mathbb{x} for x_1,...,x_k and \mathbb{g} for g_1,...,g_m, and \mathbb{g}(\mathbb{x}) for g_1(x_1,...,x_k),...,g_m(x_1,...,x_k) in your picture, the text would be exactly the same as it is in op's picture. this fails as an example of replacing symbols as words. retard.
mathfags just do it to feel superior to other people
>>108875919Nigga you don't even know the multiplication tables, shut up lil bro
>>108876195notation is not a definition, but it expresses the 2 added definitions at the top, which treat x1,...,xk and g1,...,gk as objects. It also implicitly defines a relation between them g(x), which could error but instead returns the expected string of symbols.
>>108875887APL is the superior language for math. Reminder that at first it was just that, a new symbol set for math, and it just happened to be easy to make a programming language for.>>108876149>The point of mathematical language is to be concise and precise.It fails at that. It fails at that compared to even garbage programming languages like Python let alone languages specifically designed for math.Most "pure mathematics" is a joke. We have LLMs solving PhD research-level problems. Not because it's heckin AGI!! Quite the opposite. The fact that LLMs are capable of doing this is evidence something isn't right.
>>108876253A language for bums
Mathfags are filthy code golfers
>>108876041It's a meme, sperg
>>108875620Stupid range notation is the main issue there.you would think math fags would come up with better short hand
>>108876730yeah what about 3 vertical dots no comma, sorta like :
>>108876638luke smith and steve bannon ruined this board JFC
>>108875620unironically we should all use s-expression to represent equations.
>>108875849or when you use all of them you start reusing but with different font
>>108875887>>108877162
>>108875887math is famously not a formal language
>>108875887There is no one math. Every area of math uses some sort of alphabet where the symbol might mean other things in their context, and other things in others. There is some common set of characters that share the meaning, but there are "false friends" which you can mistakenly interpret if you don't know what you are reading.
>>108875620Yeah I feel like these faggots are the same kind of people who write C code where every variable name is one or two letters, many expressions have embedded side-effects in them like e++ or theta+=5, they do things like a = (b = c++) * 2, and there are no comments in any of the code>inb4 they're smarter than you and can understand all thatno they cant, the only time I dealt with code like that it was full of bugs.
math is for unattractive people
>>108875620this is, the ABSOLUTE, worst notation I have seen in a long time jfc I hate it when they write f(x_1,x_2,...,x_n) every. fucking. time like just define an n dimensional vector X or wtv and then write once f(X) and then, it is simply assumed to be f(X) every time I write f unless it is not written as a f(Y). This carries over to regular function names so you can define these operators ACTUALLY SENSIBLY AND LEGIBLY and work with them like someone who is not a ULTRASPERG.Yes I'm a physicist so I get great pleasure from annoying mathematicians with sloppy notation.
>>108875849You can formalize it however you want. You can just define shit in math, that's what its all about. Idk got some operator O n don't wanna O(a) all the time, just define the greek letters to be the result of applying O to a Roman letter. You the write alpha instead of O(a).
>>108877688(((they))) did>>108875991
>>108876249>which could error but instead returns the expected string of symbols.bro stop coding start mathing
>>108877817There is no difference, mathematicians are just cowboy coders that have refused to use a compiler until recently.
>>108877827there is a difference. you can't compile or even check if every given proof would compile. you may be able to compute, but the creativity of math is hard to capture if you are constrained to a fixed character set. it needs free-flowing forms that can extend, shrink cover and surround their environment.math is done pen on blank paper or even better a motorized ceiling high 3 tiered chalkboard that is 30 feet long.
>>108877860It's the opposite, the ficta of mathematical objects and obsession with proof is preventing real breakthroughs in knowledge organization.
>>108875821Don't forget how many get accepted only because "looks complicated must be correct" and not because it's actually good.
>>108875887Just call all functions names like you already do with sine. Math solved.
>>108879301Maybe add namespaces for functions that have the same name.
>>108875620I want them to rewrite it in Prolog. What, they can't? Checkmate, mathfags
Engineers are getting way too cocky when they are the least important letter of STEM
>>108879346M is the least important. S is the most important. T and E are about equally high-importance.
>>108875620>>108875821math has been one giant gatekept circlejerk for hundreds of yearsthat's why you have guys like 3blue1brown nowadays that are 100x more effective at teaching it than any uni professorthey don't actually want to teach it
>>108879379There was that one prof in I think japan that called it out. Took 30 years for his book to be published, now it's the de-facto textbook for teaching the material. The preface is literally calling out mathfags for gatekeeping and deliberately trying to prevent people from learning by being obtuse on purpose. His book got a lot of backlash not because of lack of rigour or because of bad contents, but because he was making the material "too easy to learn", which is why it took so long.Going off memory so some details may be a little off.
