Criminal offences in maths textbooks

[Nesk]

The Boubaki syndrome really means the writing of mathematics in its 'purest' form, i.e. statements with minimal hypotheses and a very dry style without motivation and in principle from the ground up. The lay reader at this point should not think that by motivation I mean solving a problem in the real world. I mean explaining the reasons why one might wish to prove such a theorem.

The style has its benefits, and its drawbacks, naturally. The reader can decide for themselves if they want articles with lots of statements like 'let M be a monoid, now...'

I did a google on "Boubaki syndrome", and it yielded one single hit - which was this very page. Though I think I'm pretty sure from the discussion provided here what is meant by the term, I'm curious as to whether it is the actual name of the phenomenon?

I do not doubt, though, that there are several authors to whom one could argue that the phenomenon was attributable to the extent that eponymocity is justified.

 

[Hurkyl]

It helps to spell Bourbaki right.

 

[matt grime]

I did a google on "Boubaki syndrome", and it yielded one single hit

woo-hoo, we're a googlewhack. That means I've now been a googlewhackee twice.

 

[PowerIso]

Criminal offenses in math textbooks:

#2 Useless diagrams.
Refer to fig 1.a on page#<somepagefaraway>,
fig 1.a (a right triangle with the right angle <ABC labeled 90 degrees)
what is the sin of angle <ABC?
Just say what is sin(90) !

When they make you do problems according to the diagram *they* assign, using the variables *they* pick, so you have to flip back and forth to their stupid pictures and premises. Just so you have to use *their* book! I know what sin90 is but what the hell is sin (<ABC) is unless I buy their textbook?!

I have something similar to this. My calculus booked had a theorem and stated (proof in section 14.3) We were in Chapter 7. I look ahead to find the proof and turned out...the proof wasn't there.