MathML is a presentation format, which isn't intended for writing/editing.
LaTex is a lot better for editing
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:28 PM Yuma Decaux <jamyad7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Rick,
MathML is supposed to be a standard but reading it through a screen
reader, at least on the mac, is not very quote unquote ergonomic,
especially when you start going through longer expressions. I think the
main problem is that a lot of good willed individuals will create a
solution which might not be optimal for those who are actually using it.
For instance, on voice over, reading mathML content is not intuitive as
you cnanot copy paste the expression and read it again as in some kind of
notes. the characters won't read. Most of the time when you deal with math,
you need to be able to scribble it around, keep some references etc etc.
MathML only does the display part but it doesn't do it in a way that is
editable nor completely transparent as ascii form. Imagine you get used to
the mathML symbolism but you need to write your own thesis or answer
problem sheets etc. Will you use mathML? I certainly would not. For reading
it might be ideal for certain screen readers but I have looked into it and
it is not standardised for all browsers on all platforms.
What is rquired is a platform browser independent way of reading maths.
Again, I would invite anyone who would be willing to spend perhaps a few
days putting back all the segments of code I did into one package that
windows, mac and even linux users can read easily as all symbols will be in
ascii form.
If anyone has checked out the example I put up, please do let me know if
you have understood partially what is written and if you like the way it is
laid out.
Cheers,
On 4/04/2016, at 11:00 AM, Rick Thomas <ofbgmail@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Uma:
I will check out that paper.
After our conversation I googled Linear Algebra to brush up on the Eigen
Transforms of the Ket and Bra values as used in quantum system analysis.
While the w3c says mathml should be a web standard I found no good books
or tutorials on Linear Algebra that was accessible using my screen reader
just as I found when I was slogging through the Stanford series on quantum
physics.
I did find text books that mentioned they had mathml versions available
but mathml does not itself enable accessibility without a reader that can
convert it into speech.
Also, the w3c has mathml as a suggested standard for websites but, again,
I am not sure how that would work since I dont think any browser currently
supports mathml - not sure about that though.
I wonder how many blind folks on this list have used mathml books in their
classes and what software was required or how they managed to use it to get
through their math books – especially for calc and Linear Algebra.
Rick USA
*From:* program-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:program-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ;<program-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] *On
Behalf Of *Yuma Decaux
*Sent:* Sunday, April 3, 2016 3:26 PM
*To:* program-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [program-l] Re: About Mathematics and Software Development
Hi Rick,
Apologies if things sounded confusing but long story short, physical
properties in macro dimensions don't have any relevance in the micro
world. You are correct in terms of larger dimensions, they are just vectors
or logical constructs to understand what can be beyond a contour plot for
instance. The higher the dimension, the harder it is to explain what it
really does, however they exist and the hard part is to access snapshots
and compare them against each other. I'm still very infant at this stage
when it comes to quantum computing but I can see the methods used for it to
equate large sets of computations.
If you want to give it a try, here's the paper in mention:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3678065/quantum_computing.pdf
It's a good read, hefty and requiring breaks between paragraphs but more
worth than some crap tv series out there.
I realised you're a veteran here, but don't think age is cause for
stopping to learn :)
Best regards,
On 3/04/2016, at 9:54 AM, Rick Thomas <ofbgmail@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Again Uma:
Before I sign off I wanted to say that after considering your example over
and over I sort of get what you are saying.
That is that the system in question is a definition of a quantum computing
model construct, not of quantum physics theories of reality as we exist in
it.
You did sort of combine several, while related, not explanitory and
confusing elements into a short message without handling the relationships
between them like the hexbot rotating and how the inability to measure
position and velocity at the same point in time relates to the states the
hexbot can be in at any given point in time.
Also, you did not explain how you derived the 28 dimensions from this
system.
By the way, I would call them something like states or vectors or
something since they are not dimensions in any sense of the word other than
as a mathmatical construct, like saying a 2 dimensional or 100 dimensional
array, outside of any quantum reality they would have to exist in.
M-Theory and String Theory and Field Theory all have more than 3
dimensions but I had not heard of 28 dimensions which is what got me
rereading your posting to see if I could figure out how you got 28
dimensions but I couldn’t figure it out even with a 2 dimensional hexbot.
Anyway, again, it was very, very nice to have talked to you.
Not many folks really like this stuff nor understand it enough to want to
talk about it, even a little at any depth.
Too bad I am so far down the curve, 68 years old, tired, slow and blind
or I might pick your brain and start hitting the books again it was fun and
got my juices flowing a little indeed!
Rick USA
*From:* program-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:program-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ;<program-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] *On
Behalf Of *Rick Thomas
*Sent:* Saturday, April 2, 2016 7:13 PM
*To:* program-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [program-l] Re: About Mathematics and Software Development
It took me many, many years to get pretty good playing the guitar.
It would take me many many years to understand what you just wrote.
The abstraction of a hex nanobot with a couple of bridges to nowhere
climbing through space time and then indicating a point on a graph, polar
or rectangular 2 or 3 or more dimensional, got me confused when attempting
to understand measuring the potential, probable, entangled position and
velocity of the nanobot traversing say a worm whole without the ability to
measure its position and velocity without integrity destruction, although
one experiment has been published about a supposedly successful attempt at
doing this.
Backing out the math, I am so weak as to not able to normalize the bridge,
so I am having trouble unentangling the 28 dimensions since I don’t see how
the nanobot can pull down 28 dimensions from the Higgs Space without
disregarding both string theory and, I believe, m-theory.
I wish I had enough math to give an example but, sigh, that has been my
problem so I have to live in the rather gross world of words.
I think I would have to use a vector system with the Eigan transforms to
describe it correctly and words sort of fall as flat as the formula you get
when you integrate (2 pi r) – I think you get (pi r squared) if I remember
my calc1 days and that is pretty flat indeed.
Anyway, nice talking to you – God bless and good hunting Uma!
Rick USA
