I think this misses a pretty important part of mathematics, which I find is nessecary to grokking fields like linear algebra, algebraic geometry, algebraic topology, and many more.
What's missing is /why/ the definition is the way it is. What is it trying to encapsulate? A lot of mathematics is built up from simpler ideas being generalized until finally a purely algebraic definition is reached. The algebraic definition is completely void of context and any intuition, but it is very powerful to work with. The definition is in a sense the /result/, not the starting point!
For example, a beginning student of algebraic topology might start reading Hatcher's Algebraic Topology. Here simplicial homology is defined in terms of abstract functions d with certain properties. How did they arrive at this definition?
One answer is to start with complex analysis. Here you can notice that the complex plane and the plane without zero can be told apart by the function 1/z. This function also doesn't have an anti-derivative. Thus you begin to see how to define topology of the complex plane. Now extend this line of reasoning to the calculus of differential forms and you end up with the de Rahm Cohomology. Finally, you can realize that you can get the same results without having any interpretation of your functions. Thus begins the purely algebraic theory. The proofs may be different, but you can now /guess/ the theorems.
Of course in the above I omitted that differentials forms are defined in terms of a wedge product, which is also an abstract algebraic definition. This also has an explanation...
Modern mathematics is rife with explanations like the above, but they are often hidden away. It's very remniscient of the simple vs easy discussion of programming. The algebraic definition may be "easy" but it carries a lot of baggage.
What's missing is /why/ the definition is the way it is. What is it trying to encapsulate? A lot of mathematics is built up from simpler ideas being generalized until finally a purely algebraic definition is reached. The algebraic definition is completely void of context and any intuition, but it is very powerful to work with. The definition is in a sense the /result/, not the starting point!
For example, a beginning student of algebraic topology might start reading Hatcher's Algebraic Topology. Here simplicial homology is defined in terms of abstract functions d with certain properties. How did they arrive at this definition?
One answer is to start with complex analysis. Here you can notice that the complex plane and the plane without zero can be told apart by the function 1/z. This function also doesn't have an anti-derivative. Thus you begin to see how to define topology of the complex plane. Now extend this line of reasoning to the calculus of differential forms and you end up with the de Rahm Cohomology. Finally, you can realize that you can get the same results without having any interpretation of your functions. Thus begins the purely algebraic theory. The proofs may be different, but you can now /guess/ the theorems.
Of course in the above I omitted that differentials forms are defined in terms of a wedge product, which is also an abstract algebraic definition. This also has an explanation...
Modern mathematics is rife with explanations like the above, but they are often hidden away. It's very remniscient of the simple vs easy discussion of programming. The algebraic definition may be "easy" but it carries a lot of baggage.