Asking all resident math experts

Why can't
"E = mc^2" just be written as
''Energy =(equals) mass x(times) the speed of light multiplied by itself''?

Why is math written in coded hierohlyphics? Was everyone just trying to save space on their chalk boards at the time?

...

Because everyone in STEM is autistic with OCD, so naturally they obsess over transmitting as much information with as little work as possible, plus it has the added benefit of making it seem more incomprehensible than it really is so normies are naturally repelled.

Y'know what I'm bored enough to bite. It's easier to manipulate symbols than it is common language. Take for example this statement: Energy is equal to mass times the speed of light squared. Now we will solve this sentence for the speed of light. Energy divided by mass is equal to mass times the speed of light squared divided by mass. Now the masses cancel out of the second part of this sentence leaving us with the following: Energy divided by mass equals the speed of light squared. Now we will take the square root of both sides. The square root of energy divided by mass is equal to the square root of the speed of light squared. The second part of this sentence can be simplified and we finish with the following: The square root of energy divided by mass is equal to the speed of light.
Now if we did this with symbols we could have done this entire paragraph in 5 lines maximum. I hope this answers your question OP.

Also using symbols makes everything clearer including errors that one may make. If I made a mistake doing math in prose it would be much more difficult to locate it easily as I would have to fish around a paragraph for it as opposed to being able to go from one line to the next.

Why couldn't beethoven had written the first two measures of his fifth symphony:

"Briskly, with brightness. In two four time. All instruments begin with a rest for one quarter measure, then clarinet and strings play the note G (viola and cello one octave below violin, who plays middle G, bass two octaves below) for one eighth of a measure three times. Then clarinet and strings play the note E flat (in the same voicing) for a whole bar, and hold until the conductor cues to continue."

Why is music written in coded Italian and hieroglyphics? Was everyone just trying to save space on their paper at the time?

But you can't solve an equation of symbols unless you already know what the symbols mean and the symbols are all arbitrary.

This is why we define symbols before we use them. Hence why before you see E=mc^2 in a formal setting you will read something along the lines of: Let E be the kinetic energy, m be the mass of the object and c be the speed of light. When doing math all symbols are defined either explicitly or implicitly.

So you need to have an equation defined for you before you're presented it. Why can't it just be self explanatory?

Why dont we use caveman drawings on rocks instead of typing english characters in a taiwanese basket weaving imageboard?

Well if we didn't define things they quite literally could be anything. E=mc^2
E is the number of elephants and m is the number of men and c is the number of cocks you are sucking because you're a massive fucking faggot OP.

english (latin) characters are still caveman scribbles user

Well sans is my point? You need a guidebook defining every equation alongside any equation because it's all arbitrary nonsense in the end.

WHERE THE FUCK IS THE CALCULUS CAPTCHA????

WHY ARE BRAINLETS ALLOWED TO POST??????

Things are not entirely arbitrary however. There are certain truths which are agreed upon and proven. Now there is something to be said that some axioms are not necessarily provable but that is the definition of an axiom. I seriously recommend that you try doing math before you begin attempting to critique it's merits. But before we go our separate ways I will attempt to provide you with another counter-example. Say you came up to me and told me that 1/2 was an integer. I would be forced to ask you to define the integers because the definition for the integers within the mathematical community is an ordered ring whose positive elements are well ordered. The well ordering principle states that there is a smallest integer (1) and a ring implies that 2 elements of said ring multiplied together is an element in said ring. Now if we assumed that 1/2 was an integer, this would mean that multiplying it by itself would produce another integer. Thus 1/4 would be an integer and 1/8 and 1/16 and 1/32 and so on. However this contradicts the principle of well ordering. Thus 1/2 is not an integer. This is something that is agreed upon no matter who you ask. I hope this helps you understand how math works OP.

Correction the well ordering principle states that there is a smallest positive integer. My apologies for the error.

Are you still replying to me? I've already crushed you in argument. Just disappear.

Stop posting anime girls.

Is the female form distracting to you?

Unfortunately OP you have not crushed anything. I simply demonstrated to you that it was entirely possible to use common language to do things, while presenting the explanation that it is simply not ideal to use prose for mathematics because symbols allow us to derive meaning in a more clear and concise manner. It is entirely possible to do all math in prose and if that is the way you wish to lead your life then so be it. However these conventions that we use make arguments much clearer. I hope you will open your mind to the use of symbols OP for your own sake.

I'll explain why you're wrong later, I have other things to attend to first..

I shall wait patiently for your answer OP.

Why can't
''Energy =(equals) mass x(times) the speed of light multiplied by itself''?
just be written as "E = mc^2"?

You should try going to college OP.

This argument could be applied to any language. English is "coded hieroglyphics" too. You're very used to English so it doesn't seem that way, but if you showed an intelligent extraterrestrial species both a page of English and a page of statements written with mathematical symbols / notation, it would probably see both as equally inscrutable gibberish.

Because the former is immediately understandable and the latter is inscrutable gibberish?

>immediately understandable
You didn't immediately understand English when you were born.

No but I was taught from an early age and for free. I wasn't taught how to read your abstract hieroglyphs until I paid a tuition fee and encumbered myself with debt to the banking elite.

You could be taught mathematical language from an early and and for free too. There's nothing inherent to mathematical symbolism that prevents anyone from doing that.

English operates on a set of clearly defined and logical rules but mathematical symbolism is cow-tow from some nerd in a basement somewhere trying to explain how his mind perceives things. It's like teaching your child to speak Klingon, an insult to intelligence everywhere.

>English operates on a set of clearly defined and logical rules

Yes, it's called grammar. If you knew some you wouldn't recline yourself to using greentext all the time.

Did you ever stop to think about why we need formally defined programming languages instead of being able to just use regular English to make programs work?
The answer is regular spoken / written language is incredibly inconsistent and poorly defined. Almost every grammar "rule" you could come up with is broken one way or another. It would be hugely popular and profitable if a company released an AI program that could convincingly talk to you like a live person. No company has done this to date, specifically because spoken language is inconsistent garbage and programs are actually logical and consistent in contrast.