4 ms·
It's a wonderful proof, thanks for sharing, but the notation is really just syntactic sugar, no? It would have only been slightly clumsier to have "+60" everywh
by ChrisKnott 3y ago
It's a wonderful proof, thanks for sharing, but the notation is really just syntactic sugar, no? It would have only been slightly clumsier to have "+60" everywhere. The real insight seems more to have done the construction "backwards", starting with the equilateral.
- raincole 3y agoSyntactic sugar is powerful. There was a time the China accepted calculus, but rejected Leibniz notations. It looks this like: https://i.imgur.com/foUem6w.png https://i.imgur.com/foUem6w.png Edit: Technically this is still Leibniz notation.
- heresie-dabord 3y agoThe phrase "syntactic sugar" implies ease, but it's much more than mere "syntactic sugar" when the notation unlocks further information gain and cognitive advantage. Cheers!