- a random picture of Le petit Prince doesn't make it easier to understand
- there's a huge difference between people that don't know that you'll end up in the same place if you keep walking on a sphere and those that won't quit at "closure: A \oplus B is still in the group".
- "Rotations in 2D" doesn't explain things, it just states them. It requires reasonable understanding of all concepts.
- There are also detractors, like "However, locally, they are like \mathbb R^1, a trivial 1-dimensional Euclidean space." It isn't clear why that is meaningful.
This is not meant as criticism, just to point out that the entry level for your blog might be higher than you think/intended.
> - a random picture of Le petit Prince doesn't make it easier to understand
The post has 5 pictures, 4 technical pictures plus the picture of Le petit Prince that is whimsical while simultaneously illustrating a non-trivial point.
> This is not meant as criticism,
This is clearly criticism. You intend it as constructive criticism, and that's great, but it's criticism.
Often these pieces are written for the author's benefit, to help them sort out a topic in their head, more so than as a genuine attempt at education.
Thus, they tend to be at the level of the author rather than some imagined audience. That isn't wrong or anything I think. Not every piece of written text needs to be understandable by everyone.
Is dllup able to generate equation references with named labels, like the way LaTeX uses \label and \ref? (I looked at the "References" section of the dllup documentation, and it looks like you have to know the equation number that is going to get generated, e.g., #eq3., but I'm wondering if there is alternative syntax.) If not, is there an alternative format for putting math on the web that you like that supports this?
(Just asking in case I ever move away from my ancient Wordpress installation with the QuickLaTeX plugin.)
Intro to Lie groups for rigid rotations https://daniel.lawrence.lu/blog/y2021m07d14/