3 ms·
It breaks down to "the shortest distance between two points depends on the terrain". It can translate to layman's terms very well... unless you insist on retain
by stan_rogers 10y ago
It breaks down to "the shortest distance between two points depends on the terrain". It can translate to layman's terms very well... unless you insist on retaining terms of art like manifold in the "simplified" version. While there's nothing at all wrong with using appropriate terminology, there's also nothing at all wrong with starting with familiar models as approximations and working from there up to a more formal description either.
- eximius 10y agoUnless I misunderstood, it also has to do with the shortest of any kind of distance - it seemed to imply any metric (probably within reason) will do.
- jerf 10y ago'It breaks down to "the shortest distance between two points depends on the terrain"' Other than the trifling details that "shortest", "distance", "points", and "terrain" have little relationship to what most people would consider the normal meaning of the term, and that you also left out the fact that the terrain can be "chosen" somehow which is even less connected to what most people expect, yeah, sure. I understood enough of what the article is trying to get at to be pretty convinced it just can't get there with the level of terminology it wants to use. There's limits on what concepts you can get to with any given degree of sophistication in terminology.