Dismissiveness?

If it’s good enough for Lemmy (Kilmister), it’s good enough for them.

Notation isn’t semantics. Mathematical proofs are working with the semantics. Nobody doubts that those are unambiguous. But notation can be ambiguous. In this case it is: weak juxtaposition vs strong juxtaposition. Read the damn article.

Just read the article. You can’t prove something with incomplete evidence. And the article has evidence that both conventions are in use.

Let’s do a little plausibility analysis, shall we? First, we have humans, you know, famously unable to agree on an universal standard for anything. Then we have me, who has written a PhD thesis for which he has read quite some papers about math and computational biology. Then we have an article that talks about the topic at hand, but that you for some unscientific and completely ridiculous reason refuse to read.

Let me just tell you one last time: you’re wrong, you should know that it’s possible that you’re wrong, and not reading a thing because it could convince you is peak ignorance.

I’m done here, have a good one, and try not to ruin your students too hard.

Mathematical notation however can be. Because it’s conventions as long as it’s not defined on the same page.

Lol. Read it.

You probably missed the part where the article talks about university level math, and that strong juxtaposition is common there.

I also think that many conventions are bad, but once they exist, their badness doesn’t make them stop being used and relied on by a lot of people.

I don’t have any skin in the game as I never ran into ambiguity. My university professors simply always used fractions, therefore completely getting rid of any possible ambiguity.

How are people upvoting you for refusing to read the article?