3 ms·
"One thing to note is that there is no universally agreed upon convention for denoting math objects." This is the thing that trips me up most often. It's espec
by swimfar 6y ago
"One thing to note is that there is no universally agreed upon convention for denoting math objects."
This is the thing that trips me up most often. It's especially a problem when the author believes that their notation and variables are universal and therefore don't need to be defined. I've spent a lot of time these past few months trying to "reverse engineer" calculations done in research papers to verify their notation.
Textbooks and theses generally do a better job of defining everything because they aren't as concerned about document length.
- downshun 6y agoI think the reason is that math notation is used in context. Which is what explains the two different notations for calculus derivatives. They were interested in different things! Similarly in quantum mechanics (not my area) you may want to use bra-ket notation or matrix representations if you care about implementation details.
- downshun 6y agoHi U