> The complexity wasn't in understanding the algorithm, but in overcoming the fear of mathematical notation.
Yes. Many times I found the actual problem is something slightly different and often simpler than what people think. It's a kind of superpower to think this way.
Exactly, it's a bit unbelievable when you consider that the symbology has some unnecessary abstraction.
But yes, it's really great to then discover that it's almost elementary, so to speak. It's something that stays with you for the "next" challenge, knowing that at some point it will loosen up and the basic form will become visible.
This makes so much sense now. I was always sure that the algorithm invented by Buchberger was incredibly complex, but it seems to be easily divisible into parts making it seem much more manageable. It is(s) insane how simple things can be once you put them step-by-step.
> The complexity wasn't in understanding the algorithm, but in overcoming the fear of mathematical notation.
Yes. Many times I found the actual problem is something slightly different and often simpler than what people think. It's a kind of superpower to think this way.
Exactly, it's a bit unbelievable when you consider that the symbology has some unnecessary abstraction.
But yes, it's really great to then discover that it's almost elementary, so to speak. It's something that stays with you for the "next" challenge, knowing that at some point it will loosen up and the basic form will become visible.
This makes so much sense now. I was always sure that the algorithm invented by Buchberger was incredibly complex, but it seems to be easily divisible into parts making it seem much more manageable. It is(s) insane how simple things can be once you put them step-by-step.