Simple operations like vector multiplication are not works for the purposes of copyright law. If you invented an entirely new form of math, complete with novel formulae, you could conceivably assert patent rights and/or copyright over it, especially if you published a textbook. It would be more relevant, however, to discuss complex algorithms, such as for data compression. Those can certainly be patented. And, when implemented as a computer program, can certainly be copyrighted.
But if you’re just defining one simple operation, yeah, you’re unlikely to be able to assert any rights over it.
Ehh no, you genuinely can’t patent any form of mathematics.
Mathematics falls under “exists in nature” (if you are a Platonist) or “abstract ideas” (gets even clear thinking Constructivists). So they’re excluded from parents and copyrights no matter how complex the system
Textbooks usually belong to the publisher (academics commonly have to pirate their own papers), so that’s usually a bust.
You might be able to patent an algorithm associated with a branch of mathematics, but that’s trickier than you think. Blank slate development can, and does, happen (see Compaq’s reimplementation of IBM’s bios). You’re banking on it not being reversed engineer able (spoiler, don’t take that bet if you’ve published your proofs!).
Simple operations like vector multiplication are not works for the purposes of copyright law. If you invented an entirely new form of math, complete with novel formulae, you could conceivably assert patent rights and/or copyright over it, especially if you published a textbook. It would be more relevant, however, to discuss complex algorithms, such as for data compression. Those can certainly be patented. And, when implemented as a computer program, can certainly be copyrighted.
But if you’re just defining one simple operation, yeah, you’re unlikely to be able to assert any rights over it.
Ehh no, you genuinely can’t patent any form of mathematics.
Mathematics falls under “exists in nature” (if you are a Platonist) or “abstract ideas” (gets even clear thinking Constructivists). So they’re excluded from parents and copyrights no matter how complex the system
Textbooks usually belong to the publisher (academics commonly have to pirate their own papers), so that’s usually a bust.
You might be able to patent an algorithm associated with a branch of mathematics, but that’s trickier than you think. Blank slate development can, and does, happen (see Compaq’s reimplementation of IBM’s bios). You’re banking on it not being reversed engineer able (spoiler, don’t take that bet if you’ve published your proofs!).