3 ms·
Well, I am sure the meat of the theorem is just in those eigenvalues of the minors. Which are not even defined in the statement of the theorem. That's not acade
by auggierose 7y ago
Well, I am sure the meat of the theorem is just in those eigenvalues of the minors. Which are not even defined in the statement of the theorem. That's not academic. That's just bad style.
- snakeboy 7y agoHe also didn't define eigenvalue in the theorem statement, but you don't seem to be criticizing that as bad style. Part of the art of mathematical exposition is to walk the line between under and over explaining your process based on your audience. If the intended audience is academic mathematicians or even just people with a math degree, then the notation is probably familiar. I imagine that's the target audience here.
- auggierose 7y agoI can now say exactly what I don't like about the theorem statement: That the definition of the eigenvalue notation was not well-scoped. This made it much harder for me to understand what is going on, and has nothing to do with the actual semantic meaning of eigenvalues. Caring about proper scoping is also something mathematicians usually do not, making everything more complicated than it has to be in the process.