I can't stand the sans serif typesetting and cramped mathematical formulas. The tone is kind of obnoxious, too.
When he introduces group theory:
Group theory basics. It is time to note that our one-parameter symmetries are groups in the sense of modern algebra. Why? To masturbate with nomenclature as you do in an abstract algebra class? No. Because, as you will soon see, studying the group structure of a symmetry of a differential equation will have direct relevance to reducing its order to lower order, and will have direct relevance to finding some, possibly all of the solutions to the given differential equation—ordinary, partial, linear, or nonlinear. So what is a group?
I don't get the pedagogical purpose of calling what one does in an abstract algebra class "masturbating with nomenclature." I think every word in a textbook should be crafted with a pedagogical goal in mind. Making the material more light-hearted and less daunting is a valid purpose, but this tone just seems sour.
In fact, I count three uses of the word "masturbate" in the notes.
I prefer something like Richard Feynman's style, where he makes a subject accessible while still respecting the subject.
What really struck me about that lecture is that he only uses one blackboard throughout the entire talk, and he doesn't start writing on it until 20 minutes in. I wish more lectures and talks were like that.
When he introduces group theory:
Group theory basics. It is time to note that our one-parameter symmetries are groups in the sense of modern algebra. Why? To masturbate with nomenclature as you do in an abstract algebra class? No. Because, as you will soon see, studying the group structure of a symmetry of a differential equation will have direct relevance to reducing its order to lower order, and will have direct relevance to finding some, possibly all of the solutions to the given differential equation—ordinary, partial, linear, or nonlinear. So what is a group?
I don't get the pedagogical purpose of calling what one does in an abstract algebra class "masturbating with nomenclature." I think every word in a textbook should be crafted with a pedagogical goal in mind. Making the material more light-hearted and less daunting is a valid purpose, but this tone just seems sour.
In fact, I count three uses of the word "masturbate" in the notes.
I prefer something like Richard Feynman's style, where he makes a subject accessible while still respecting the subject.
Here's a fantastic example of Feynman explaining how a computer works, using an analogy of an ever-faster filing clerk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWGGDXe5MA