No. Languages are also, of course, languages, i.e., notation. If every chemist changed notation every 3 years, there's an off chance that one might develop so

No. Languages are also, of course, languages, i.e., notation. If every chemist changed notation every 3 years, there's an off chance that one might develop something better than Hill notation, but it would also make it unbearable to try to read the literature. I don't think it's controversial to suggest that this would be a net loss for the field. Computer science is young enough that we don't have any universal notation yet, but I've learned a couple dozen programming languages and my conclusion is that maybe 1 new language per decade is worth using. We're churning notation way faster than is productive.