Re: RPN (was Re: TI-83+)
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: RPN (was Re: TI-83+)
> n
>------
>2^(n-1)-1
>
>Now, when I look at that original equation, I see n 2 n 1 - yx 1 - /. I
don't
>see n/(2^(n-1)-1). Some people see other the latter but not the former.
It
>doesn't mean that I'm more intelligent becase I see the former; it just
means I
>look at it differently. Do realize, however, that the TI version took 13
>keystrokes while the RPN version took only 12.
Sure, when you look at that equation you think of the operations in the
order they are performed, but to actually write down that mental process
takes some mental conversion to the reverse notation. Our brains don't
"think" in any particular notation, we just see it like it is. The TI way
is more inuitive (so to speak) because it more closely resembles what is
written on the page, and what is written on the page is how everybody has
learned math since grade school. To read and write RPN, you must do that
mental conversion (like the mental conversion to French in your example). I
dislike having to do mental conversions. Certainly if I practiced RPN it
would become second nature. If I practiced my French more, that would
become second nature too. However, since I don't need much French living
here in the States, and since I don't need RPN on my TI calc, I very much
prefer to stay with what I learned first.
> In fact, the only sign of lower intelligence would be the person who
>arbitrarily refused to learn the other notation.
More a sign of laziness than lower intelligence. Am I lazy? Sure! But if
the TI does what I need, why relearn how I do math? I also arbitrarily
refuse to learn Mac O/S. I was raised on DOS and got used to Windows. As
much as I hate Bill Gates, it would be too much trouble to dump all my
experience and start over with a new system. I just don't have the
willpower to get over that learning hurdle even if it's easier on the other
side. And besides, it's only a little bit easier on the other side. For a
10% improvment in ease or speed of use, It's not worth the frustration to
learn another system.
>Objectively, RPN requires fewer keystrokes. This is true and proven.
And the Dvorak Keyboard requires you to move your hands around less.
True and proven, because it was designed that way. But so what? Qwerty was
first. Dvorak can't get its foot in the door. Nobody wants to learn how to
type all over again.
Is algebraic entry better than RPN? Not really. It algebraic entry easier
to adapt to than RPN? Absolutely. And when a lot of students struggle in
math anyway, ease of use right-out-of-the-box-having-never-touched-one-
before is what counts.
******************************************************************
* To UNSUBSCRIBE, send an email TO: listserv@lists.ppp.ti.com
* with a message (not the subject) that reads SIGNOFF CALC-TI
*
* Archives at http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/calc-ti.html
******************************************************************