The annual subscription cost for this journal is $3,250.
I am bewildered that we continue to tolerate this state of affairs.
Feel free to reach out with any questions you might have!
That said -- and keep in mind that this might be different in different academic disciplines -- I'm not sure that this would be appealing work for a graphic designer. There just isn't room for creativity of any sort. Mathematics papers have an extremely homogeneous look and feel, and everyone in the discipline is perfectly okay with that.
Maybe textbook companies would be a better bet -- although with its $200+ textbooks that industry has its own set of problems. That said, if I were writing a student-oriented book (as opposed to a research paper), I would welcome the chance to work with someone with creative ideas for the visual presentation.
Good luck!
Sure it was not his 8 year old child?
[edit] in this particular case the person had likely gotten by pattern-matching 1, a slash, and a 3, as one-third, and simply never cared why one might write 3/1 to mean 3, for example. Why do that, after all? I see a one, I see a slash, and I see a 3. One-third. It’s worked every single time before so why would your thing be a special case?
For example, I saw a thread on Reddit the other day where someone mentioned "taking the 30 seconds to read something"; the discussion went on a tangent where someone called themselves a slow reader because it took them a whole minute, and then others chimed in that it was taking them longer still. So, I timed myself and it took me 14 seconds to read it.
What that made abundantly clear to me was that my own experience in the world - seeing _words_ as first class entities everywhere, immediately tagged and understood as whole components, instantly, without ever "reading" them... is not everyone else's experience. Some adults who nominally believe themselves to be literate must actually have to sit there and spend some effort to recognize each letter and sound out a word, the way my children did when they were ~4 (and some children get even younger). What is the world like for these people? I can often speed-read a paragraph and come away with an understanding within seconds, skimming over it for key words and familiar grammatical constructs; my assumption is that most people posting here can do the same. Maybe that's not the case?
There's also a lot of talk on the Internet in the last year or two about inner monologue, with the growing realization that it is likely that a large part of the population simply does not experience the ability to talk to themselves within their own head. This makes me wonder if they can read silently without having to mouth the words; perhaps this is the tip of the iceberg for a differentiation in intelligence that hasn't really been extensively studied yet (unsurprisingly, since psychometrics are not in vogue right now).
Interesting. Would you really qualify that as being like "quieter volume", or was it more like it was harder to "recognize" words out of the dialogue?
> Obviously not the case in deaf-mutes who never learned to speak of course.
I wonder what reading is actually like for these folks, since letters symbolize sounds; they _must_ recognize word-at-a-time with no sub-vocalizing, right? I hope we get lucky and a random person with experience in the field stops by ;)
Not that I don't agree with your overall message but petty one-upsmanship at things one should never strive to one-up someone else on is kind of a staple of Reddit and that's probably what you were reading.
You could argue that of any number system, but if you can count to ten and understand "more left of decimal point = bigger, more right = smaller" then most comparisons in numerals are easy. 0.25 vs 0.33, 1/4 vs 1/3. We are, I believe, the only animals able to comprehend either, especially in conjunction with units of measurement.
Side note, but one of my favourite gotchas is in optimisation - say for a race car, where we want to minimise time (for a constant distance), rather than maximise speed. Strictly speaking, they're equivalent, but people doing the latter almost always end up focusing on top speed, and overlooking the time lost going slowly.
You might guess from the above that I’m pretty firmly in the camp that thinks “k-12 math just isn’t mathy enough and that’s why it’s bad” is dangerously wrong. You’d be right about that.
Journals employ language editors to smooth out papers written by non-native speakers with a poor command of the language. If you want to edit for language you have to comprehend somewhat the content. People who know mathematics and are willing to put up with poor language skills are rare.
Is that because writing usually pays terribly?