5 ms·

Nice gatekeeping, friend. I've also personally never heard my math graduate student friends talk like this.

haskellandchill 8y ago
Some of their language is unfortunate but they pulled through with the sharing part. It is quite hard to share maths with others however. How can I share that feeling inside my brain algebraically closed fields give me?
- tome 8y ago
  > How can I share that feeling inside my brain algebraically closed fields give me? Poetry.
  - haskellandchill 8y ago
    it was correct by construction stretchy compactness continuity we wrote numbers in the sand watched the glass dance of entropy against tired eyes until our vision blurred remaining only feeling legs crossed in a field blade of grass simplification is hard work it's clear there is no enemy but misunderstanding
    - tome 8y ago
      This is great!
    - kybernetikos 8y ago
      it's clear there is no enemy but misunderstanding Has a lot of resonance. Is it a reference to something?
      - haskellandchill 8y ago
        References to Dijkstra "Simplicity is a great virtue but it requires hard work to achieve it and education to appreciate it.", Greek and Indian sand-based mathematics education, and a bit of constructivists and grappling with topology and analysis.
    - deedree 8y ago
      Perfect fit. Did you write this yourself? If no, may I know where it's from?
      - haskellandchill 8y ago
        Wrote it. Used to be a poet. Not my best work heh.
- fspeech 8y ago
  That's the reason why NLP is hard. Language is good for communicating things where the two sides already share a model of. It is much harder to communicate a new model than filling out the details of an existing model.
- ginnungagap 8y ago
  >How can I share that feeling inside my brain algebraically closed fields give me? That's kinda like returning home after a long day, because algebraically closed fields are about the nicest structure you can hope to find yourself working in!
  - rocqua 8y ago
    The algebraic numbers aren't complete. So you cannot measure the circumference of circles in them, nor does a series like sum(1/k!) converge. Personally I'd posit finitely generated abelian groups as the nicest structures. Perhaps there is also something to be said for finite algebraically closed fields.
    - ginnungagap 8y ago
      There are no finite algebraically closed fields, but I see your point, it depends on what you have to do really, if you want to do any kind of analysis completeness is great, but being more on the logic/model theory side I like all algebraically closed fields!
      - haskellandchill 8y ago
        Ya'll rock.
- pphysch 8y ago
  Plenty of math is demonstrable in a tangible way--see the scientific method. That you can't communicate a particular piece of math suggests that it has no tangible relation to physical phenomena. To me, that's a major red flag.
  - romwell 8y ago
    >suggests that it has no tangible relation to physical phenomena. A lot of mathematics is that way, and there's nothing wrong with that. Sometimes mathematical concepts do find tangible physical phenomena that demonstrate them - but sometimes, centuries after they've been invented. Mathematics is often about what one can imagine. Our imagination can be inspired by the world around us, but it is not limited by it. It's not a red flag that some concepts don't have short explanations. Sometimes you really just have to know the full joke to get the punchline.
romwell 8y ago
Gatekeeping? Quite the opposite. Rather, sadness. I think that the system has failed the author, and deprived them of fun. If I met them, I'd tell them the same thing I'd tell you: come back to math! There's fun and beauty in it, and suffering is not a necessary component of that. As far as your math grad friends go: the school, most likely, is failing them. Statistically, about half of them are depressed. Most have no job prospects that will allow them to keep doing what they are trained to do (simple matter of #students >> #positions). Ask them how often they considered suicide (not if), the answers may surprise you. Graduate school does make mathematics (amd life) a funless process way too often - and that's a problem. But that's not how things should and can be. Please read Lockhart's Lament I linked to in order to understand my point better. What I ultimately am saying is that what is being pushed onto people as math is way to often isn't really, in a way that a cheese product isn't cheese.
- iorrus 8y ago
  I read Lockhart's Lament, I had the opposite reaction, maths is one of the few arts that is actually taught in school. If it had as little practical application as painting or music it would be nonexistent as a school subject. He is wrong in that painters and musicians tend to get rigorous instruction in the basics before they become independently creative. Picasso's realism phase. Musical theory etc.
  - romwell 8y ago
    >He is wrong in that painters and musicians tend to get rigorous instruction in the basics before they become independently creative. They still get to do it: they get to paint, play, sing, etc. Most math students don't get to do math. They learn about it until a year or two into grad school sometimes. >maths is one of the few arts that is actually taught in school. His point is that what is taught is mathematics as much as the names of notes is music.
    - posterboy 8y ago
      Don't forget that the elementary math learned by the billions was ince new and exiting. The proofs are simple enough to stay implicit, but the learning process is creative discovery. Because you need to see applicability of what is learned, in order to remember it. Consequently, many don't even successfully learn about maths. Insofar you are right, but wrong and elitist to generalize.

Some of their language is unfortunate but they pulled through with the sharing part. It is quite hard to share maths with others however. How can I share that feeling inside my brain algebraically closed fields give me?

tome 8y ago
> How can I share that feeling inside my brain algebraically closed fields give me? Poetry.
- haskellandchill 8y ago
  it was correct by construction stretchy compactness continuity we wrote numbers in the sand watched the glass dance of entropy against tired eyes until our vision blurred remaining only feeling legs crossed in a field blade of grass simplification is hard work it's clear there is no enemy but misunderstanding
  - tome 8y ago
    This is great!
  - kybernetikos 8y ago
    it's clear there is no enemy but misunderstanding Has a lot of resonance. Is it a reference to something?
    - haskellandchill 8y ago
      References to Dijkstra "Simplicity is a great virtue but it requires hard work to achieve it and education to appreciate it.", Greek and Indian sand-based mathematics education, and a bit of constructivists and grappling with topology and analysis.
  - deedree 8y ago
    Perfect fit. Did you write this yourself? If no, may I know where it's from?
    - haskellandchill 8y ago
      Wrote it. Used to be a poet. Not my best work heh.
fspeech 8y ago
That's the reason why NLP is hard. Language is good for communicating things where the two sides already share a model of. It is much harder to communicate a new model than filling out the details of an existing model.
ginnungagap 8y ago
>How can I share that feeling inside my brain algebraically closed fields give me? That's kinda like returning home after a long day, because algebraically closed fields are about the nicest structure you can hope to find yourself working in!
- rocqua 8y ago
  The algebraic numbers aren't complete. So you cannot measure the circumference of circles in them, nor does a series like sum(1/k!) converge. Personally I'd posit finitely generated abelian groups as the nicest structures. Perhaps there is also something to be said for finite algebraically closed fields.
  - ginnungagap 8y ago
    There are no finite algebraically closed fields, but I see your point, it depends on what you have to do really, if you want to do any kind of analysis completeness is great, but being more on the logic/model theory side I like all algebraically closed fields!
    - haskellandchill 8y ago
      Ya'll rock.
pphysch 8y ago
Plenty of math is demonstrable in a tangible way--see the scientific method. That you can't communicate a particular piece of math suggests that it has no tangible relation to physical phenomena. To me, that's a major red flag.
- romwell 8y ago
  >suggests that it has no tangible relation to physical phenomena. A lot of mathematics is that way, and there's nothing wrong with that. Sometimes mathematical concepts do find tangible physical phenomena that demonstrate them - but sometimes, centuries after they've been invented. Mathematics is often about what one can imagine. Our imagination can be inspired by the world around us, but it is not limited by it. It's not a red flag that some concepts don't have short explanations. Sometimes you really just have to know the full joke to get the punchline.

romwell 8y ago

Gatekeeping? Quite the opposite. Rather, sadness. I think that the system has failed the author, and deprived them of fun. If I met them, I'd tell them the same thing I'd tell you: come back to math! There's fun and beauty in it, and suffering is not a necessary component of that. As far as your math grad friends go: the school, most likely, is failing them. Statistically, about half of them are depressed. Most have no job prospects that will allow them to keep doing what they are trained to do (simple matter of #students >> #positions). Ask them how often they considered suicide (not if), the answers may surprise you. Graduate school does make mathematics (amd life) a funless process way too often - and that's a problem. But that's not how things should and can be. Please read Lockhart's Lament I linked to in order to understand my point better. What I ultimately am saying is that what is being pushed onto people as math is way to often isn't really, in a way that a cheese product isn't cheese.

iorrus 8y ago
I read Lockhart's Lament, I had the opposite reaction, maths is one of the few arts that is actually taught in school. If it had as little practical application as painting or music it would be nonexistent as a school subject. He is wrong in that painters and musicians tend to get rigorous instruction in the basics before they become independently creative. Picasso's realism phase. Musical theory etc.
- romwell 8y ago
  >He is wrong in that painters and musicians tend to get rigorous instruction in the basics before they become independently creative. They still get to do it: they get to paint, play, sing, etc. Most math students don't get to do math. They learn about it until a year or two into grad school sometimes. >maths is one of the few arts that is actually taught in school. His point is that what is taught is mathematics as much as the names of notes is music.
  - posterboy 8y ago
    Don't forget that the elementary math learned by the billions was ince new and exiting. The proofs are simple enough to stay implicit, but the learning process is creative discovery. Because you need to see applicability of what is learned, in order to remember it. Consequently, many don't even successfully learn about maths. Insofar you are right, but wrong and elitist to generalize.