Are there any researchers that try to develop learning materials to teach the core mathematics knowledge without using notation (and instead just plain English -- preferably without images)?
2026-02-24 03:07:42.1771902462
Math without notation
808 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in LEARNING
- What is the determinant modulo 2?
- Is it good to learn measure theory before topology or the other way around?
- Can the action-value function be "expanded"?
- If you had to self -study a course in higher math that you know, and passing it was a matter of life and death, what advice would you give yourself?
- Beggining in funcional analysis
- Worrying about logic and foundations too much
- Using Visualization for Learning: $a^0=1$
- How do/did you go about learning math?
- Different true/false definition in lambda calculus
- Rules for multiplication serge lange problem
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
You'll notice throughout the development of mathematics, and dependent branches such as physics, the use of mathematical notation increases more so as the field becomes more advanced. For instance, Isaac Newton's Principia is a renowned book on the early development of physics and mathematics, and yet you will find it hard to find someone who has actually read (and understood) the text itself.
The question is, why is this so? Consider this passage:
''If a body $A$ should, at its place $A$ where a force is impressed upon it, have a motion by which, when uniformly continued, it would describe the straight line $Aa$, but shall by the impressed force be deflected from this line into another one $Ab$ and, when it ought to be located at the place $a$, be found at the place $b$, then because of the body, free of the impressed force, would have occupied the place $a$ and is thrust out from this place by the force and transferred therefrom to the place $b$, the translation of the body from the place $a$ to the place $b$ will, in the meaning of this Law, be proportional to this force and directed to the same goal towards which this force is impressed. Whence, if the same body deprived of all motion and impressed by the same force with the same direction, could in the same time be transported from the place $A$ to the place $B$, the two straight lines $AB$ and $ab$ will be ...''
and so on and so forth. This is Newton's explanation of his second law, expressed conicsely today as $$\mathbf{F}=m\mathbf{a}.$$
Newton's Principia was written as to be coherent to a wider audience, but of course we can see that, as this passage is representative of the entire structure of the text, it is extremely tedious and often terribly complicated. Writing out a mathematical idea was terribly difficult to do without mathematical notation, and if it wasn't for the geometric drawings of Newton's, a whole explanation would be impossible.
It was obvious to people that mathematics needed to become symbolic so as to have more concise works, remove ambiguity, and save heaps of time writing.