Not sure what you mean by this. > The goal of math animation should be to highlight and travel the natural geodesics of the concept space, with natural starts

Not sure what you mean by this. > The goal of math animation should be to highlight and travel the natural geodesics of the concept space, with natural starts and stops too. > The rest is cargo culting. A geodesic as I understand it is the curve representing the shortest path between two points in some manifold. So take one thing that I have found math animations useful for: showing the path of travel of some parametric system. Is that a geodesic? Not necessarily in the cartesian space of the system. I don't know what it would mean for it to be a natural geodesic of the concept space. For me the goal of math animation is the same as the goal of any math visualisation: to improve understanding and intuition. When I animate something (Which I only ever do for myself) that is why I do it. Am I cargo culting in your estimation? Let's take another example: Say I do an animation of some sort of force problem in mechanics. I can show the paths of some particles in the simulation and the magnitude and direction of the various vectors vs time. Is that cargo culting? It's definitely not any kind of geodesic. Does it help my understanding? Quite possibly. In that sense in the blog post you are addressing, in my opinion the position vs momentum distribution animation is really great because it really helps my intuition of how those probability distributions are related and how one would change as the other changes.