Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums / MathGroup Archive
-----

MathGroup Archive 2009

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Re: "Do What I Mean" - a suggestion for improving

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg97096] Re: [mg97049] Re: "Do What I Mean" - a suggestion for improving
  • From: Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz at mimuw.edu.pl>
  • Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 04:54:38 -0500 (EST)
  • References: <gogc0l$oga$1@smc.vnet.net> <200903041209.HAA27033@smc.vnet.net>

On 4 Mar 2009, at 13:09, AES wrote:

> In article <gogc0l$oga$1 at smc.vnet.net>,
> Bill Rowe <readnews at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> While I understand this is small comfort to a new user, there
>> really isn't much else to be said. Mathematica forms a rich
>> complex toolset for doing mathematica analysis. Any such system
>> will require significant time and effort on the part of an user
>> to become proficient in making use of its capabilities.
>
> I'm afraid that this, if true, is small comfort to me -- but it's
> because I thought that the point to Mathematica was making a toolset
> with which many different levels of users -- smart high school juniors
> and seniors, college students at all levels, working engineers at BS  
> or
> MS levels, professionals in many other fields without extensive math  
> or
> computer science bckgrounds -- could do both analytical and numerical
> analyses, make plots, graphs, animations, demonstrations, in their own
> areas, **without having to invest "significant time and effort" (which
> they may simply not have) in learning the increasingly arcane,  
> massive,
> and complex complications involved in working with Mathematica.

Well, clearly you have been labouring under an false belief.  
Mathematica is a program of huge power but how much of this power you  
can utilize depends on the amount of time and effort that you invest  
in becoming proficient in it. Now, because this power is huge, even a  
small amount of time and effort invested ( > 0) will produce a fair  
return, but obviously much less than will be obtained by someone who  
invests more. Is that really surprising or wrong?

Andrzej Kozlowski
>
> The second sentences above says,  "Mathematica forms a rich complex
> toolset for doing mathematica [NOTE: 'mathematica'] analysis."
>
> Freudian slip?

I think a more fitting reference here would be not to Freud but to  
Euclid. I mean his supposed remark to Ptolemy I : there is not royal  
road to geometry. There isn't one to Mathematica either.

Andrzej Kozlowski




  • Prev by Date: Re: Conjecture: 2n+1= 2^i+p ; 6k-2 or 6k+2 = 3^i+p
  • Next by Date: Re: Conjecture: 2n+1= 2^i+p ; 6k-2 or 6k+2 = 3^i+p
  • Previous by thread: Re: "Do What I Mean" - a suggestion for improving
  • Next by thread: Re: "Do What I Mean" - a suggestion for improving