4 ms·

If you click past the landing page to the explanations you’ll see LaTeX there. Clicking dynamics leads here: https://www.complexity-explorables.org/explorable

If you click past the landing page to the explanations you’ll see LaTeX there. Clicking dynamics leads here: https://www.complexity-explorables.org/explorables/ride-my-kuramotocycle/ https://www.complexity-explorables.org/explorables/ride-my-k...

ColinWright 6y ago
So, you actually mean that you hope not to see equations. But it's the equations that are the real meat of these things. Pictures are pretty, but they are generated from the equations, and the equations capture the understanding and the modelling. The equations are the content, it's the equations that let us do calculations, predictions, and quantitative analysis. What would you hope to see instead? I don't understand what you're asking for. Are you asking to understand these things without doing the actual mathematics? That would seem rather ambitious, so I'm guessing I don't know what you're asking for. I see elsewhere you've pointed here: https://github.com/barbagroup/CFDPython https://github.com/barbagroup/CFDPython That amounts to an entire course on the subject. So if you're asking to have that sort of thing instead of a page that shows the equations and the maths, then you're asking that someone produce an entire course on the subject, instead of just a primer. That feels like someone complaining that an overview page isn't a degree level textbook. So I guess I still don't understand what you're asking for.
- complexcity 6y ago
  This feels very personal for you? The site is called complexity explained and I am challenging the question of ‘explained to whom’? Someone who already knows the notation or someone interested in having complexity explained to them? > Are you asking to understand these things without doing the actual mathematics? This is one of the saddest things that comes from academically trained mathematicians: some believe the notation is the math. Or worse, pretend to to retain a sense of superiority to those yet to learn it.
  - ColinWright 6y ago
    Ah, thanks. Now I know where you're coming from. One of the saddest things I see is people who say they want to understand maths without actually putting in any work to do so. They want it "explained" so it's all obvious without expending any effort beyond reading about it. Math isn't the notation, the notation isn't the math, and I don't know any mathematician who thinks it is. Notation is a tool for communication, and its survival and persistence is evidence that the fastest and most effective way to communicate deep understanding is for the one doing the understanding to learn the language being used. But equations are more than a tool for communication, they are also for the processing and manipulation of concepts. Learn to read and understand those equations and you gain much more than just an understanding of these concepts here. The pages "behind" the one submitted here do have explanations which are then quantified in the equations. You don't need to read the equations to get a general sense of what's going on, and once you do have a sense of what's going on, the equations are not too hard to read. I'm guessing I'll never convince you, but I really do think your demands are misguided, and your characterisation of mathematicians is wrong. > ... one of the saddest things that comes from academically trained mathematicians ... pretend to to retain a sense of superiority to those yet to learn it. That's a pretty nasty thing to say, and to be honest, I rather resent it. I'm also saddened that it's your experience of mathematicians, as most of the ones I know spend much of their time genuinely trying to help people understand stuff, and get joy out of seeing the lights go on. I'm sorry you haven't met them.
    - complexcity 6y ago
      I will simply reiterate what bookends my unedited original comment: > I hope to see the end of LaTex only explanations. > Show both if you can.

ColinWright 6y ago

So, you actually mean that you hope not to see equations. But it's the equations that are the real meat of these things. Pictures are pretty, but they are generated from the equations, and the equations capture the understanding and the modelling. The equations are the content, it's the equations that let us do calculations, predictions, and quantitative analysis. What would you hope to see instead? I don't understand what you're asking for. Are you asking to understand these things without doing the actual mathematics? That would seem rather ambitious, so I'm guessing I don't know what you're asking for. I see elsewhere you've pointed here: https://github.com/barbagroup/CFDPython https://github.com/barbagroup/CFDPython That amounts to an entire course on the subject. So if you're asking to have that sort of thing instead of a page that shows the equations and the maths, then you're asking that someone produce an entire course on the subject, instead of just a primer. That feels like someone complaining that an overview page isn't a degree level textbook. So I guess I still don't understand what you're asking for.

complexcity 6y ago
This feels very personal for you? The site is called complexity explained and I am challenging the question of ‘explained to whom’? Someone who already knows the notation or someone interested in having complexity explained to them? > Are you asking to understand these things without doing the actual mathematics? This is one of the saddest things that comes from academically trained mathematicians: some believe the notation is the math. Or worse, pretend to to retain a sense of superiority to those yet to learn it.
- ColinWright 6y ago
  Ah, thanks. Now I know where you're coming from. One of the saddest things I see is people who say they want to understand maths without actually putting in any work to do so. They want it "explained" so it's all obvious without expending any effort beyond reading about it. Math isn't the notation, the notation isn't the math, and I don't know any mathematician who thinks it is. Notation is a tool for communication, and its survival and persistence is evidence that the fastest and most effective way to communicate deep understanding is for the one doing the understanding to learn the language being used. But equations are more than a tool for communication, they are also for the processing and manipulation of concepts. Learn to read and understand those equations and you gain much more than just an understanding of these concepts here. The pages "behind" the one submitted here do have explanations which are then quantified in the equations. You don't need to read the equations to get a general sense of what's going on, and once you do have a sense of what's going on, the equations are not too hard to read. I'm guessing I'll never convince you, but I really do think your demands are misguided, and your characterisation of mathematicians is wrong. > ... one of the saddest things that comes from academically trained mathematicians ... pretend to to retain a sense of superiority to those yet to learn it. That's a pretty nasty thing to say, and to be honest, I rather resent it. I'm also saddened that it's your experience of mathematicians, as most of the ones I know spend much of their time genuinely trying to help people understand stuff, and get joy out of seeing the lights go on. I'm sorry you haven't met them.
  - complexcity 6y ago
    I will simply reiterate what bookends my unedited original comment: > I hope to see the end of LaTex only explanations. > Show both if you can.