Hacker News Reader

I regularly explain my PhD thesis on napkins. The explanation involves twins, one with a broken nose; fish; GPS satellites; and a tractor driving in a field.

Somehow this holds a crowd better than non-linear 72-dimensional space, and isometric and rigidity matrices.

View on HN

But could they (1) extend your results or (2) have enough of an understanding of it to apply it to their work? The benefit of a napkin explanation is that they understand it well enough to know whether it would be useful/interesting to learn the issue better. If they really want to apply your results, though, then they'll need a better understanding. It's true that math papers aren't good for giving a surface-level intro to a subject, but they're not made for that. They're made so that if someone really wants to learn the subject, then they can.

Very valid point. I suppose I just think we could make room in scientific papers, especially in the digital age, for an explanation of how the idea came about. I spent most of my early research career trying to find out how mathematicians got their ideas in the first place, because no amount of learning mathematics seemed to teach that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com