【Hacker News搬运】数学写作如果忽略了人的维度,那就太枯燥了
-
Title: Math writing is dull when it neglects the human dimension
数学写作如果忽略了人的维度,那就太枯燥了
Text:
Url: https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2024/03/why_mathematics_is_boring_1.html
数学论文通常被认为很无聊,但作者并不这么认为。作者希望读者也不这么认为。然而,作者提到,很多时候,他们在阅读数学论文时,会被大量的枯燥文字所打击。作者认为,数学写作可以很乏味,因为它忽略了人的维度。 作者建议,我们可以从故事讲述者那里学到如何吸引读者的兴趣。每个人都喜欢故事,我们一直在讲述和听故事,这是理解世界的一种基本方式。作者相信,当我们阅读数学时,我们内心深处其实是在读一种高度精炼和升华的故事,它有角色和情节,有冲突和解决。 作者提出了一些建议,以提高数学论文的吸引力。首先,论文的开头应该吸引人,让读者想要继续阅读。其次,应该设定背景,让读者了解故事发生的环境。然后,需要发展角色,突出数学实体的重要性和特性。此外,应该创造冲突和紧张,突出证明过程中的困难和挑战。最后,结论应该让读者感到安心,同时提醒他们还有未解决的问题。 这些建议需要时间和实践才能熟练掌握,但它们可以帮助数学论文更吸引人,让读者在阅读过程中感到自然流畅。这篇论文原本打算成为一本书的贡献,作者推荐这本书,其中有很多关于数学和叙事之间互动的见解。
Post by: mathgenius
Comments:
mycologos: As somebody who works in a mathy subarea of computer science, oh man, I agree. My heart always falls when I need a result and it turns out the original paper is some terse typewritten notice from the 70s whose first sentence is a definition with a bunch of proper nouns and whose main theorem is given at the most general possible level with no applications at all.<p>I have talked with math people about why this is, and responses are some combination of<p>a) being concise and being elegant are the same, same for maximum generality/abstraction<p>b) the people who should read the paper don't need things explained<p>c) I am afraid that some smart egotistical professor whose opinion I value for some reason will call me soft if I add extra handholding material<p>(Nobody has ever really said c, but my sense is it's true. Academic writing has a lot of imitation of style to prove you're part of the in-group.)
mycologos: 作为一个在计算机科学数学领域工作的人,哦,天哪,我同意。当我需要一个结果时,我的心总是往下跳,原来这篇论文是70年代的一些简洁的打字通知,它的第一句话是用一堆专有名词定义的,它的主要定理是在最一般的水平上给出的,根本没有应用<p> 我已经和数学界的人讨论过为什么会这样,他们的回答是<p>a)简洁和优雅是相同的,为了最大限度地通用性是相同的;抽象<p>b)应该阅读论文的人不;我不需要解释<p>c)如果我添加额外的抓握材料,我担心一些聪明的利己主义教授会因为某种原因而认为我很重视他的观点,他会说我软弱<p>(没有人真正说过c,但我的感觉是这是真的。学术写作有很多模仿风格的东西来证明你是团队中的一员。)
Brian_K_White: I always liked Lockhart's Lament<p><a href="https://maa.org/sites/default/files/pdf/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://maa.org/sites/default/files/pdf/devlin/LockhartsLame...</a><p>It makes a very different point about teaching, or learning/discovering math, not writing about math.
Brian_K_White: 我一直喜欢洛克哈特;s Lament<p><a href=“https://;/;maa.org//!sites/:default/…files/,pdf/;devlin/&LockhartsLament.pdf”rel=“nofollow”>https:///;maa.org/x2F;站点;默认/;文件/;pdf;devlin;LockhartsLame</a> <p>它对教学或学习提出了非常不同的观点;发现数学,而不是写数学。
bedobi: I’m no mathematician, so I only took basic school math, but I hated every moment of it. Mostly because overwhelmingly there was never any context or justification for learning any of it. Why does this exist? What actual real world problems does it solve? How did folks come up with and it, prove it works and start using it? Crickets. Just learn this formula, then that. The first time I heard the ancients calculated the distance to and size of the moon with trigonometry I was floored. Oh ok so that’s the kind of cool shit they came up with it for. Now I’m listening.
bedobi: 我不是数学家,所以我只学了基础数学,但我讨厌它的每一刻。主要是因为绝大多数情况下,学习它从来没有任何背景或理由。为什么会存在这种情况?它解决了现实世界中的哪些实际问题?人们是如何想出它的,证明它有效并开始使用它的?蟋蟀。只需学习这个公式,然后再学习那个。当我第一次听到古人用三角法计算到月球的距离和大小时,我惊呆了。哦,好吧,这就是他们想出这个主意的原因。现在我在听。