2 ms·
If you have the general form, and subtyping, then you have everything in a simpler interface. And you get all the subtype to subtype operations for free, bug f
by Nevermark 3y ago
If you have the general form, and subtyping, then you have everything in a simpler interface.
And you get all the subtype to subtype operations for free, bug free, since they are all just subtype operations themselves.
If you haven’t played around with geometric algebra, you should try it.
It is consistent across any. N dimensions.
And when you are using it in an application, it’s easier to see why things are related the way they are. You have fewer equations.
- chpatrick 3y agoOK but I already have the subtype to subtype operations available bug-free today. Why do I care if they're implemented in geometric algebra or not, especially if it's less efficient?
- Nevermark 3y agoIf you have what you need, then you have what you need. If you were starting greenfield, geometric algebra probably simplifies more than you would guess, and represents more. When anything gets simpler, more consistent, and more powerful, most of us start having ideas that would never have occurred to us before. Same story as any other significant language and/or notation improvements. It is a mystery to me why it has taken so long to catch on and replace disparate less capable notations. Inertia I guess. Hard to change geometry across education all at once, but piecemeal would be very messy. I don’t know any reason it would be less efficient.