To be clear, I was commenting on what math study feels like. The worst of it being when I do not actually follow a proof (due to laziness, ill-preparedness, or any other lack of ability) and somehow come to rely on the theorem as fact. I suppose this is both unavoidable and an illustration of my own capacity to blindly follow a perceived authority.
It sounds to me that you are speaking of an explorative mathematical practice, one with a fixed logic and a context. One where deductions act as a holonomic constraint for deriving further tautologies[1]. While there is something of this in any mathematical exploration, I feel that the characterization is a bit thin. In my experience, the acquisition of mathematical ideas come with a psychological/conceptual development on my part, and not simply *more of the same* as *tautology* would imply. This subjective experience I would not only hesitate to abstract away but possibly consider the meaningful content. The changes to my mind are what I seek in mathematical practice, and something like auto-suggestion appears to sit at its core. [1] to paraphrase Wittenstein -- Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
