Science Forums 2

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by logy

After reading through a few pages of this topic, which seemed quite interesting to begin with, I have noticed a few recurring patterns

1. A gentleman called Don Blazys keep presenting complex arguments in a form that is very difficult to read, even for math professionals !
2. He is also making some claim about and is using a complicated math identity and is totally unrelated to that claim in order to make it look fancy.
3. The main reason that most people can't see through this, is due to the combination of the fact that the arguments are quite complicated, and the fact that they are being presented in an unreadable way !
4. both Craig and Qfwfq have been more then accommodating, to the point of reformatting the arguments into a more readable format, as well as entertaining the notion that is different somehow from simply .
...
Do you agree guys? if you have anything to say, please do

I agree – oh, and a belated welcome to hypography, logy!

Originally Posted by Don Blazys

Sorry, but I only began using a computer recently, so I don't know how to set up "links", nor do I know how to write in "LaTex" or put up "Smilies".

To create links, enclose the URL of the page to which you wish to link with [url] and [/url]. For example,
[url=http://hypography.com]Hypography Science Forums[/url]
will produce this link: Hypography Science Forums. To have your link display text other than the URL’s title, use something like
[url=http://hypography.com]hypography’s main page [/url]
, which display as hypography’s main page .

To enter a smiley, type :). For more exotic ones than a simple , like , click the “more” link on the “smiley” panel on the “Reply to Thread” page, and select from the page that pops up.

Originally Posted by Don Blazys

Euler, Fermat and Gauss didn't use LaTex either.

It doesn't make me wrong, just "old fashioned".

Euler, Fermat and Gauss didn't use LaTeX because, when they wrote, it didn’t exists. Had it, they almost certainly would have.

They wrote in the best and most accepted medium of their day, pen on paper. When writing for others, they wrote neatly, so that their writing could be understood with a minimum of effort spent interpreting their glyphs and notation. They didn’t writing in stings of horizontally separated characters, press cuneiform marks into clay tablets, etc., because this would have made their writing unnecessarily difficult to read.

Pen/pencil on paper is still an acceptable medium. To transmit it electronically, it’s necessary to capture a facsimile of it with a device such as a scanner or digital camera. These image files can be uploaded to your hypography “photos” gallery or any of many free image hosting websites. Because this process is labor and time-consuming, and the resulting images usually less readable than a LaTeX-rendered equivalent, most math writers prefer to use the LaTeX markup language, either transcribing their paper notation into it, or working in it directly, or using editors such as this online equation editor.

Like most markup languages, the LaTeX math package is easy to learn. There are many online references and tutorials, including this hypography thread, and this one. You may see examples of the LaTeX used in any post by clicking on its “quote” button. And, finally, any thread with questions or request for instruction on using LaTeX or other site features will be gleefully answered by our members.

If you persist in refusing to learn conventional online writing techniques, Don, you’re likely to be taken un-seriously or worse. Because most readers are aware how easy they are to learn, not using them leads one to wonder why someone should bother reading someone who is unable to learn them, or suspect that you are purposefully avoiding learning or using them in order to make yourself difficult to understand. I don’t believe you intend the latter, nor are unable to learn to these techniques, so strongly encourage you to learn and use them.