4 ms·
> One thought that comes to mind is that I'm not convinced the bottom part of the triangle should be there. It implies a direction connection that I'm not sure
by Double_Cast 10y ago
> One thought that comes to mind is that I'm not convinced the bottom part of the triangle should be there. It implies a direction connection that I'm not sure exists.
I should have included this quote to begin with. I'll put it in now.
In any case. A direct connection does exist. If you follow the link, there are other examples where the (+) operator would be useful besides parallel resistance.
- jerf 10y agoNow I see. Thanks. I still think it implies a degree of symmetry that will confuse students, though, and that the notation can be further improved from what was proposed there. The operation in question is not trilaterally symmetric, and using a trilaterally symmetric symbol is probably misleading. The root symbol is arbitrary, but at least it doesn't promise nonexistent symmetries.
- Double_Cast 10y agoThe root symbol (as a multi-valued function) returns the roots of unity (multiplied by a scalar). Which is like, the posterchild of imaginary symmetries. </pedantry> More seriously. The selling point of the triangle operator is that it highlights isomorphisms between the three more traditional operators as a cyclic group. Which is a symmetry, just not the commutativity that students might naively expect. So I suppose it's a double-edged sword. I agree that it sucks as an operator. Nonetheless, the video could help a lot of students.