This is still clear, but much clumsier.

In a face-to-face situation the same diagram

would be used throughout, and the speaker would point to the parts of the diagram being
referred to at the appropriate moments. The stumbling-block is the translation of an act of
pointing into a diagram. Once we have drawn an arrow, we cannot erase it in a way which
corresponds to the withdrawal of one's hand; we have to re-draw the diagram. And the arrows
also clutter the diagram. because they are too like part of it. Different colours would help.
Another use of words has been to suggest new classifications to the reader: for
example, that a straight line may be considered as a particular kind of angle. This can also be
shown visually. It takes more space, but is more vivid. There is a certain resemblance to a
strip-cartoon, and if one has the resources and ability to translate this into computer graphics,
the visual presentation can retain all its advantages. What would be the stages of such an
animation? The following is one possibility. Note that the first figures represent the data.
Here we use letters as a substitute for pointing. When the letters are found in the
(verbal-algebraic) proof, we then have to find these letters in the diagram, and this tells us
where to look. This is neater than the long arrows used on page 97 and saves re-drawing the
diagram. Which is the easier to follow, the reader must judge for himself. this too could with
great advantage be translated into computer graphics.
How does the 'purely visual' approach cope with more complex proofs? Space must
limit us to one further example—a proof of this more general theorem already referred to.
Is this clearer than a verbal-algebraic proof (for which, see any traditional school
geometry text), or is it another case of 'look, no hands'—-this time, no words? Since
individuals differ in their preferences for visual or verbal-algebraic symbolism, there may be
no general answer to this question. At present the latter system has achieved dominance. The
chief purpose of the foregoing has been to question this fait accompli and examine the
particular contribution of visual symbolism.
Historically, one of the happiest marriages of the two systems is that due to
Descartes (1569—1650). Any point in the plane of the paper is specified by its distances from
two (usually perpendicular) lines. that is, by two numbers, written as an ordered pair. These
coordinates, as they are called, may be positive or negative. A variable point corresponds to a
pair of numerical variables; and a set of points with a given characteristic property, for
example, that their distance from the origin is always equal to r, is_represented by
an_equation satisfied by all the pairs of coordinates (x, y). By these means curves which are
difficult to draw accurately can be represented algebraically: for example, an ellipse, which is
the shape of a planet's orbit round the sun; a parabola, which is the shape a reflector must be
to give a parallel beam (as for a car headlight) or to concentrate distant rays to a point (as for
a radio telescope). Both general and metrical properties can be dealt with in this way: general
properties, by using general relations between variable coordinates, and metrical properties,
by giving particular numerical values to these variables. What this algebraical treatment of
geometry adds is great power of manipulation and accuracy far beyond what is available by
accurate drawing to scale and measurement of the drawing. But we still need the drawing to
show what the set of points looks like as a whole. It is, for example, not obvious from the
equations that the curve represented by y2=4a disappears into the distance in two directions,
or that the curve represented by 7a+5a
joins itself again, or that a simple change of sign in the latter will give us something
looking completely different.
That neither kind of representation is superior in all ways is suggested by the fact
that we often use the method in reverse. Instead of starting with a known curve (all the above
were known to Greek geometers about eighteen centuries before Descartes) and representing
it algebraically, we may start with an algebraic concept, that of a function, and represent it
graphically.
The idea of a mathematical function is one of great generality. Broadly speaking, functions
tell us how the objects in one set correspond to those in another: for example, how the
distance travelled by an object may be found if we know the time; how the current through a
given circuit may be determined if we the voltage. Functions may be represented in a variety
of ways, including equations and graphs.
For finding individual correspondences, an equation is very convenient. For example,
if d metres is the distance travelled by a body in free fall under gravity (neglecting air
resistance) and t seconds the time it has been falling, then d = 4•9 P. So the distance fallen
after one second is 4•9 X 4 metres, after two seconds it is 4•9 X 4 metres, and so on. By
taking (t, d) as Cartesian coordinates, we can show graphically the function as a whole.

THE TWO SYSTEMS COMPARED

Tentatively, we may now attempt a summary of the contrasting, and largely

complementary, properties of the two kinds of symbol.
Visual Verbal-algebraic
Abstracts spatial properties. Such as Abstracts properties which are independent
Shape, position of spatial configuration, such as number

Harder to communicate Easier to communicate

May represent more individual thinking May represent more socialized thinking

Integrative, showing structure Analytic, showing detail

Simultaneous Sequential

Intuitive Logical

The communicable, socialized properties of the verbal-algebraic system have doubtless

contributed to its predominance over the visual system. Yet whenever we want to represent
also the overall structure of some topic, argument or situation, visual symbolism returns, as in
organization charts (from firms to football teams), flow diagrams and family trees. The value
of visual symbolism is also shown by the way in which it superimposes itself on the verbal -
algebraic, in the form of spatial arrangement of written symbols. Auditory symbols are
inevitably sequential in time. When written down, they are present simultaneously, the
sequential arrangement being restored by scanning them in a conventionally agreed order.
But this order may be departed from whenever we like. We may look quickly at the beginning
and conclusion of an argument before examining details. We may recapitulate whenever we
wish, and this becomes necessary more often as the argument becornes more involved. In
other words, a verbal-algebraic exposition, once written down, shows the overall structure in
addition to the logical-sequential implications within the structure, and it may be scanned in
other ways besides the conventional left to right, top to bottom, order. Spatial symbolism
finds its way into every detail of the verbal-algebraic system.
 1. The position of a digit helps to show what number it represents.
2. Position shows which number is subtracted from which,
3. or divided by which.
4. Position shows correspondence between two sets, as in this proportion.
5. Its spatial arrangement is an essential property of a matrix.
Many other examples could be given. Before concluding this chapter, it will be interesting to
return briefly to the individual differences in imagery noticed by Galton and mentioned at the
beginning. If we are right in thinking that visual imagery is that most favourable to the
integration of ideas, and if it is not accidental that when we first become aware of how ideas
relate to each other, we refer to the experience as insight, not as inhearing, then we might
reasonably hypothesize that persons who have been noteworthy for their contributions to
mathematical and scientific understanding will be found to use visual rather than auditory
imagery. We may as well begin the list with Galton himself, who tells us that his own visual
imagery was clear but that he lacked verbal fluency. Einstein (1879— 1955), in a letter to
Hadamard, states that his preferred imagery is visual and motor, and that conventional words
or other signs have to be sought for laboriously, only in a secondary stage' (Hadamard, 1945).
A famous non-mathematical example is that of Kekule (1829—96), whose conception of the
ring structure of the benzene molecule came to him in a dream where he saw a snake taking
hold of its own tail. And the Nobel Prize winner Bragg (1890— 1971), in a television
programme honouring his eightieth birthday, stated that his new ideas came to him for the
first time in the form of visual images.
This list is a partial and selective one, and we lack the comprehensive information about other
famous mathematicians which would support or refute the hypothesis. An interesting
discussion, along more general lines, of personality traits of mathematicians and others is to
be found in Appendix 2 of Macfarlane Smith's Spatial Abiliy; where much other material of
interest in the present context may also be found.
Analysis, logical argument and socialized thinking are, rightly, much valued in
mathematics, but we also need synthesis, insight and individual thinking. To some extent the
former seem to be capable of being taught; the latter, at present, can only be sought. If we can
discover more about the functions of the two kinds of symbol discussed in this chapter, and
become one skilled in choosin an using them, this might well help us to develop and relate
these two comlementary aspects of our mathematical thinking.

the theorem given last tells us that this angle is twice the size of thus angle

but the size of this angle is two right angles

so the size of this angle is one right angle