3 ms·

Writing an article on a complex mathematical subject that is sufficiently rigorous, with citations and references, but also sufficiently simple for a layman to

Writing an article on a complex mathematical subject that is sufficiently rigorous, with citations and references, but also sufficiently simple for a layman to understand is hard. In fact, one might even suggest that you may need a very large number of attempts at articles until you find one that meets your exacting needs. On the plus side, however, I'm sure when you see such an article you'll know straight away that it's the article for you being neither hot nor cold, as it were. Interestingly, your apparent frustration at not seeing such an article in the (relatively) few that you have read would lead me to suspect that you think that it is quite easy to write such an article. Maybe even as easy as it would be for you to be sure you have found it? Who knows? Maybe that assertion is correct. Fortunately, it has been noticed that there are a number of similar types of problems i.e. that appear hard to perform but easy to verify. There is also a great deal of interest in the mathematical and computing communities in knowing whether, what many of us consider are hard, are in fact, easy. I would attach a link but I have a feeling you've already seen it. BTW on the subject of logical fallacies, may I suggest that dismissing all the articles on Wikipedia because of one article in an English daily newspaper, even though it may well have been correct, is a tad rash? There are definitely fallacies and inaccuracies in Wikipedia but there are in English newspapers too. Often remarkably similar fallacies and inaccuracies but I digress.

orionblastar 14y ago
Wikipedia is not accepted as a source by universities. http://library.williams.edu/citing/wikipedia.php http://library.williams.edu/citing/wikipedia.php http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-founder-discourages-academic-use-of-his-creation/2305 http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-founder-dis... http://theminaretonline.com/2007/04/19/article1475 http://theminaretonline.com/2007/04/19/article1475 http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/paperref.htm http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/paperref.htm In fact, Wikipedia had a scandal recently. http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-wikiland-paid-pr-scandal-erupts-at-wikipedia/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-w... Not only that but they get some facts wrong and refuse to correct them: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-wikipedia.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/09/an-open-... I don't really see why Wikipedia is considered a valid source of anything in academia or learning things. I don't think it is 'easy' to write an article, in fact I know it is hard and difficult without making mistakes and having logical fallacies bad grammar and other things. I was a computer programmer and became sick and disabled and took up writing. I don't have the money to continue my college, so I have to rely on what is on the Internet. But I often find what is on the Internet is either, wrong, has errors, uses logical fallacies, is inaccurate, make nonsense, or leaves things out. I am starting to find that books are better and more accurate and easier to understand and read than your typical collection of articles at Wikipedia, or posts on Reddit or anywhere else for that matter. The best responses I got on this thread is to read some books that the various computer science courses offer, that is the best advice I can get. Instead of links to stuff I already read or watched and got confused by. I understand the downvotes, I don't understand something, and since I am questioning one of the main parts of computer science I am seen as a threat and in order to discourage me from asking more questions and drive me from HN, my comments will be downvoted by dupe accounts until I am no longer asking questions or participating here. I think I have valid questions, valid criticisms, and I am being honest in that I am confused and don't understand it. I am not pretending to be an expert on the subject and faking stuff, I am trying to learn but it is very difficult.

orionblastar 14y ago

Wikipedia is not accepted as a source by universities. http://library.williams.edu/citing/wikipedia.php http://library.williams.edu/citing/wikipedia.php http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-founder-discourages-academic-use-of-his-creation/2305 http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-founder-dis... http://theminaretonline.com/2007/04/19/article1475 http://theminaretonline.com/2007/04/19/article1475 http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/paperref.htm http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/paperref.htm In fact, Wikipedia had a scandal recently. http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-wikiland-paid-pr-scandal-erupts-at-wikipedia/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-w... Not only that but they get some facts wrong and refuse to correct them: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-wikipedia.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/09/an-open-... I don't really see why Wikipedia is considered a valid source of anything in academia or learning things. I don't think it is 'easy' to write an article, in fact I know it is hard and difficult without making mistakes and having logical fallacies bad grammar and other things. I was a computer programmer and became sick and disabled and took up writing. I don't have the money to continue my college, so I have to rely on what is on the Internet. But I often find what is on the Internet is either, wrong, has errors, uses logical fallacies, is inaccurate, make nonsense, or leaves things out. I am starting to find that books are better and more accurate and easier to understand and read than your typical collection of articles at Wikipedia, or posts on Reddit or anywhere else for that matter. The best responses I got on this thread is to read some books that the various computer science courses offer, that is the best advice I can get. Instead of links to stuff I already read or watched and got confused by. I understand the downvotes, I don't understand something, and since I am questioning one of the main parts of computer science I am seen as a threat and in order to discourage me from asking more questions and drive me from HN, my comments will be downvoted by dupe accounts until I am no longer asking questions or participating here. I think I have valid questions, valid criticisms, and I am being honest in that I am confused and don't understand it. I am not pretending to be an expert on the subject and faking stuff, I am trying to learn but it is very difficult.