Sichu Lu (@lu...), quoting "Name can't be bl..." (@Algon_...), which quotes an upvoted forum comment (198 votes)
— quoting "Name can't be bl..." (@Algon_...), which quotes an upvoted forum comment (198 votes)
Sichu Lu(Sichu.Lu218...) ✅ @lu... · 13h
isn't this true in general not just math? like it saves on compute to use your inner representations to think about a problem. and a lot of the time thinking represents different modalities(constructive versus destructive modes of thoughts)outside contributions helps someone easily do that
> QUOTED: Name can't be bl... @Algon_... · 14h
> The Tao that makes sense is not the Tao.
>
> [Embedded forum comment card, 198 upvotes]
> I find there is a world of difference between explaining things to a colleague, and explaining things to a close collaborator. With the latter, one really can communicate at the intuitive level, because one already has a reasonable idea of what the other person's mental model of the problem is. [highlighted:] In some ways, I find that throwing out things to a collaborator is closer to the mathematical thought process than just thinking about maths on one's own, if that makes any sense.
💬2 🔁2 ♡15 📊1K
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
A Twitter thread (likely referencing a LessWrong/forum comment, given the "Tao" quip and upvote count) discussing how explaining ideas to a collaborator is closer to genuine mathematical/creative thought than solitary thinking — relevant to Nathan's collaborative work style with Claude instances.
epistemicscollaborationmathematicsthinkingtwitterlesswrong-adjacent