This is super interesting. I love how concisely they are able to convey a certain concept. I feel the ratio: amount of knowledge you acquire versus length of the explanation is incredibly high, which makes me want to keep opening more and more tabs. The only place where I have the same feeling is in fermatslibrary.com, although in a different way. I would like to see the same concept applied to CS.
For more random interesting theorems with outrageously clever and beautiful proofs, the "Proofs from THE BOOK" [1] book is a fantastic collection. As a curiosity, "THE BOOK" in the title comes from Erdos, who often referred to the book in which God keeps nice proofs of math theorems :)
Would you look at that. That's good enough for me, thanks.
Though are you getting the full pdf's? I'm using Sage and a lot are linking to PDF's with "A newer version of this theorem description is now being hosted at:
www.theoremoftheday.org/Theorems.html"
Also some are linking just to the home page. I'm wondering if this is just me or you're getting the same.
I was also confused. Personally, I find the use of tau nonsensical -- especially when it's used alongside pi.
Established conventions should only be changed when there's a clear need to do so. Inventing a redundant constant does little other than add additional cognitive load. It's not like the tau advocates can break backwards compatibility -- there's too much literature that uses pi. The result is that everyone must now remember both pi and tau.
I think tau was used on purpose in that article to avoid confusion with the prime counting function, typically denoted pi (unrelated to the constant pi)
I wish the authors would include a small note "tau = 2*pi". Maybe one day it won't be necessary, but for the foreseeable future it would quite increase readability.
This is really interesting, but my heart hurts at the SEO value lost in having the main content be all PDFs. Not that there's really a NEED to have all of this crawl-able & indexable by search engines, but it could probably reach a whole lot more people if it was.
Nah. These PDFs are look to be about 150K-300K. A typical bloated 2016 web page has an equal amount of JavaScript, let alone images, so not really worse off using PDFs.
Assuming (generously) a 100k visitors at half a megabyte per visitor, a top HN placement will only cost a few dollars in bandwidth.
