When it comes to calculating, RPN seems like it be more direct and correct because it is actually what an expression actually means, a series of steps. Algebra tends to abstract that.
That said, as a once upon a time (and sometimes still) theorist, familiarity makes working with algebra just easier. You also tend to logically group terms together merely because that's how things are written, with multiplication implicit by writing factors together but having to write out the infix + (or -) out and it makes it easier, in some ways to reason about expression in physical[0] way. For example, you see people doing various expansions, like perturbation theory, and then assigning physical meaning to terms (like linear term is simple harmonic oscillator, quardratic is this non-linearity, and so on in the taylor series). This grouping of terms is totally due to the abstraction infix notation gives you.
That said, people get lost in the abstraction and forget it's just steps in a calculation. Forgetting the actual meaning of the notation is where mistakes and confusion about things like convergence and such really stem from (I can flesh out this argument but I'm already rambling here). It also is part of the reason I think that some scientists find programming hard to understand because they are so tied to the mental abstraction of infix notation, whereas infix is literally what happens on a computer anyway, and is thus naturally suited to a programmer's mindset.
So there's value to both, I think. It is a shame though that RPN isn't as widely taught or used as it once was.
[0] physical in the sense of physics interpretation.
That said, as a once upon a time (and sometimes still) theorist, familiarity makes working with algebra just easier. You also tend to logically group terms together merely because that's how things are written, with multiplication implicit by writing factors together but having to write out the infix + (or -) out and it makes it easier, in some ways to reason about expression in physical[0] way. For example, you see people doing various expansions, like perturbation theory, and then assigning physical meaning to terms (like linear term is simple harmonic oscillator, quardratic is this non-linearity, and so on in the taylor series). This grouping of terms is totally due to the abstraction infix notation gives you.
That said, people get lost in the abstraction and forget it's just steps in a calculation. Forgetting the actual meaning of the notation is where mistakes and confusion about things like convergence and such really stem from (I can flesh out this argument but I'm already rambling here). It also is part of the reason I think that some scientists find programming hard to understand because they are so tied to the mental abstraction of infix notation, whereas infix is literally what happens on a computer anyway, and is thus naturally suited to a programmer's mindset.
So there's value to both, I think. It is a shame though that RPN isn't as widely taught or used as it once was.
[0] physical in the sense of physics interpretation.