Timeline for Value of "of course" in the mathematical literature
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 19, 2017 at 2:18 | comment | added | MickLH | It's very useful when you are outlining your train of thought that led to a novel derivation. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 0:14 | history | protected | Todd Trimble | ||
| Dec 4, 2013 at 22:04 | comment | added | Patrick I-Z | I would say that it often means 'it is obvious a posteriori". And this few words make the difference between men and machines. Machines don't say "of course", they say the obvious :-) | |
| Aug 24, 2013 at 0:40 | comment | added | JRN | Also asked at Mathematics StackExchange and Academia StackExchange. | |
| Aug 24, 2010 at 8:34 | answer | added | BTO | timeline score: 8 | |
| Aug 24, 2010 at 2:57 | comment | added | Thierry Zell | These keywords should be red flags when you're writing: you'll want to thoroughly check any of those statements. But they have their place, especially in the more expository parts of a paper, to distinguish facts that are easily proved -- an invitation to the readers to prove it for themselves -- from facts that are not easy at all, but happen to be well known (or ought to be well-known). | |
| Aug 24, 2010 at 2:39 | answer | added | Anthony Pulido | timeline score: 4 | |
| Feb 25, 2010 at 6:16 | answer | added | Mark B Villarino | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 24, 2010 at 16:35 | answer | added | Olivier | timeline score: 17 | |
| Feb 24, 2010 at 11:33 | answer | added | Zavosh | timeline score: 13 | |
| Feb 24, 2010 at 9:23 | history | edited | Douglas S. Stones | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 97 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2010 at 3:52 | answer | added | Q.Q.J. | timeline score: 21 | |
| Feb 24, 2010 at 3:24 | answer | added | Álvaro Lozano-Robledo | timeline score: 14 | |
| Feb 24, 2010 at 1:45 | comment | added | Ben Webster♦ | I'll just note: reading this post lead me to search the paper I'm in the process of revising for "Obviously" and "Of course." I didn't delete all of them though; I kept, for example, "Obviously, this is a dissatisfying state of affairs..." refering to a theorem I hadn't proved. | |
| Feb 24, 2010 at 1:39 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Ben Webster♦ | ||
| Feb 23, 2010 at 23:56 | history | edited | Pete L. Clark | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 1 characters in body
|
| Feb 23, 2010 at 23:16 | answer | added | Scott Carter | timeline score: 4 | |
| Feb 23, 2010 at 22:22 | answer | added | Marty | timeline score: 50 | |
| Feb 23, 2010 at 22:01 | history | edited | Joel David Hamkins |
Added writing tag
|
|
| Feb 23, 2010 at 21:47 | answer | added | Joel David Hamkins | timeline score: 82 | |
| Feb 23, 2010 at 21:47 | comment | added | j.c. | When I read papers I usually pause a bit at the "obviously", "trivially" and "of course" just to make sure I've followed everything. I think the value of these phrases isn't necessarily one in terms of manipulating pieces of a logical argument, but rather a style choice to break up the flow and give readers with less background or experience a chance to think things through with something easy. | |
| Feb 23, 2010 at 21:45 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | It is of value, I think, to separate the routine parts of an argument from the nontrivial parts. But, of course, what is routine depends heavily on one's background. | |
| Feb 23, 2010 at 21:42 | history | asked | Douglas S. Stones | CC BY-SA 2.5 |