[QUOTE=hrak;46156104]Amusing physics thing: when people go "I don't need this math anyway, I'm good at theory so I can get people to do the math for me"
It's an even more pretentious version of Ideas Guys™ who want an entire team of programmers and artists to make video games for them (usually for free) because their ideas are just that good[/QUOTE]
"I'm good at theory." But the math is the theory.
It's true though that I suck at churning out calculation, like difficult integrals and shit. I'm more of an algebraist than an analyst.
[editline]5th October 2014[/editline]
When people say that they're good at theory but other people can do the math, that's generally code for "I'm a crackpot who hasn't taken the time to learn any of the requisite math."
the difference between math and philosophy is that in philosophy when you come to the conclusion that 2=1 you win an award
[editline]5th October 2014[/editline]
i h8 statics, ive done differential equations, three levels of calculus, and several other physics classes, but i don't know what im doing half the time
[QUOTE=Sableye;46156732]the difference between math and philosophy is that in philosophy when you come to the conclusion that 2=1 you win an award
[editline]5th October 2014[/editline]
i h8 statics, ive done differential equations, three levels of calculus, and several other physics classes, but i don't know what im doing half the time[/QUOTE]
That's a bit extreme. I'm not into philosophy really, but on a fundamental level it is kind of a requirement for science, at least the philosophy regarding the nature of knowledge. I do agree that it seems modern philosophy hasn't been as important (or helpful at all?) for modern science, though.
[QUOTE=Falubii;46157527]That's a bit extreme. I'm not into philosophy really, but on a fundamental level it is kind of a requirement for science, at least the philosophy regarding the nature of knowledge. I do agree that it seems modern philosophy hasn't been as important (or helpful at all?) for modern science, though.[/QUOTE]
na im just in an ethics class right now and my professor likes to twist truths around till his viewpoint is the only one that can exist and this is a class full of engineering students philosophy is useful for understanding and deconstructing things, also the process is very mathematical in many ways, but i was just making a funny point
Hey guys! 1st year Economist here.
I've been put into the MATH I ANNUAL (As there is another one but SEMESTER that is for cracks) and the prof are sooooo good that I've actually taken interest into learning more about maths...just pure maths.
My question is: I've been having problem justifying things (For example, when in an exam a T or F exercise appears, and it says "justify" I'm like "FUCK") no matter how much I revise the theory (Fun Fact: I can do everything =/= T o F almost 100% right).
What could help me?
EDIT: More specifically, on the TRUE ones, where you have to give a GENERAL proof. I mean, justifying FALSE for me is easy. You just give a counter example and call it a day...but the TRUE ones....oh my god.
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;46160581]Hey guys! 1st year Economist here.
I've been put into the MATH I ANNUAL (As there is another one but SEMESTER that is for cracks) and the prof are sooooo good that I've actually taken interest into learning more about maths...just pure maths.
My question is: I've been having problem justifying things (For example, when in an exam a T or F exercise appears, and it says "justify" I'm like "FUCK") no matter how much I revise the theory (Fun Fact: I can do everything =/= T o F almost 100% right).
What could help me?
EDIT: More specifically, on the TRUE ones, where you have to give a GENERAL proof. I mean, justifying FALSE for me is easy. You just give a counter example and call it a day...but the TRUE ones....oh my god.[/QUOTE]
What sort of problems are you talking about? Can you post an example?
There are many different methods to establish or refute the categorical truth-hood of a statement.
[QUOTE=Fourier;46151090][IMG]http://mathinsight.org/media/applet/image/large/nonlinear_2d_change_variables_map_area_transformation.png[/IMG]
Today I heard about those non-linear transformations. Nice stuff indeed.
[editline]4th October 2014[/editline]
To bad I can't handle linear transformations yet.[/QUOTE]
That is a conformal map defined by a holomorphic function. Here's one I like. 1/Z. Doesn't count as holomorphic though because it is undefined at Z=0.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/udBcr0U.gif[/IMG]
[QUOTE=PopLot;46160974]What sort of problems are you talking about? Can you post an example?
There are many different methods to establish or refute the categorical truth-hood of a statement.[/QUOTE]
Well, for example,
[IMG]http://k32.kn3.net/0/9/C/B/7/9/2B5.png[/IMG]
Take D = I know that plus infinite less minus infinite is invalid. It doesn't give 0...but....how do I put it into those symbols and letters?
Taking Elementary Calculus this semester, hopefully I can make use of the resources in this thread.
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;46165433]Well, for example,
[IMG]http://k32.kn3.net/0/9/C/B/7/9/2B5.png[/IMG]
Take D = I know that plus infinite less minus infinite is invalid. It doesn't give 0...but....how do I put it into those symbols and letters?[/QUOTE]
If I'm interpreting your question correctly, you're missing some of the subtlety of the question. For instance, when f(x) = 1/x^2 and g(x) = 1/x^2, lim x->0 is +infinity, but clearly lim x->0 (f(x) - g(x)) = 0 in that case. The fact that you can't manipulate infinities as simply as you might like doesn't mean that we can't subtract two functions with infinite limits to get a function with a finite limit.
I just started Multivariable Calculus at uni, woo
Any chance of someone pointing me towards a good source for statistics, mainly for scientific papers? We are asked/required/forced to read a ton of papers, yet no one really takes the time to explain or teach how statistical tests actually work. The lectures can usually be summarised as "use this test if case A, use this test if case B etc..."
I find it really idiotic to be asked to critically analyse papers when we have no idea how various statistical models and tests work. I don't simply mean what they do, but the principles behind them. I'm the kind of person who can only understand a topic if I can figure out how it works as opposed to regurgitating facts, especially in mathematical subjects. If I hadn't taken a basic stats course in high school even standard deviation would be alien.
Mind you, I haven't had anything to do with maths in the past 3+ years so I might be slightly rusty. And I've never liked statistics to begin with so it will be even harder, but hey I really want to understand more about what I'm reading and all the help will be extremely appreciated!
I don't know of any off the top of my head. Do you have any particular tests that you struggle to understand?
[QUOTE=Krinkels;46168527]I don't know of any off the top of my head. Do you have any particular tests that you struggle to understand?[/QUOTE]
That is the problem, I mean even basic things like t-tests, ANOVA, ANCOVA etc... are a bit difficult to wrap my head around (again, not what they do, how they work) but what I'm really trying to do is build up sufficient knowledge to be able to look tests up (through wikipedia or otherwise) and actually be able to understand what is being said so I can figure it out for myself.
I know this might be a tall order though.
I don't know much about statistics, so I don't know exactly what terminology you should know. On the other hand, most continuous probability distributions are defined and manipulated using calculus. I imagine it is vital to understanding most of these tests and you should learn it if you haven't already.
According to a [url=http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/74908/is-there-a-textbook-handbook-with-full-derivations-for-statistical-machine-l]stackexchange[/url] question, most stats textbooks will cite things which explain what's going on behind the scenes.
Besides that, I recommend just googling a derivation of the concept in question, then googling whatever you don't understand in the derivation, and repeating until you reach familiar territory.
As far as I know, these things are much harder to derive and prove than they are to use.
[QUOTE=Fetret;46168707]That is the problem, I mean even basic things like t-tests, ANOVA, ANCOVA etc... are a bit difficult to wrap my head around (again, not what they do, how they work) but what I'm really trying to do is build up sufficient knowledge to be able to look tests up (through wikipedia or otherwise) and actually be able to understand what is being said so I can figure it out for myself.
I know this might be a tall order though.[/QUOTE]
id check paul's notes, they're very ordered and well put togather
[editline]6th October 2014[/editline]
if you're looking for derivations of statistic functions though i don't think those really would help, most of the derivations are very messy
I'm a CS Major and I want to focus heavily on mathematics. Any comments?
[QUOTE=proboardslol;46173624]I'm a CS Major and I want to focus heavily on mathematics. Any comments?[/QUOTE]
you're not already focused on mathematics being computer science?
i kid, anybody diving into mathematics is good
[QUOTE=proboardslol;46173624]I'm a CS Major and I want to focus heavily on mathematics. Any comments?[/QUOTE]
Not the comment you're expecting I think, but [URL="http://jeremykun.com/"]this guy's blog[/URL] is pretty neat. Lots of different maths subjects he addresses.
[QUOTE=Sableye;46178361]you're not already focused on mathematics being computer science?
i kid, anybody diving into mathematics is good[/QUOTE]
I enjoy diving into mathematics in what little spare time I get.
I am a medical student.
What is wrong with me?
[QUOTE=AlienCreature;46181932]I enjoy diving into mathematics in what little spare time I get.
I am a medical student.
What is wrong with me?[/QUOTE]
I'm on the same boat! I even picked Pharmacology for BSc, because it had calculus as part of pharmacokinetics (obviously amongst other things).
Good luck with the studies man!
I miss the floor of Pi version. :(
[QUOTE=Bradyns;46184220]I miss the floor of Pi version. :([/QUOTE]
I could have gone for ceiling(pi) but I'm a topologist at heart that non-continuous function shit don't fly with me
Thought I may as well try to learn LaTeX
What do you think of my shitty and non-rigorous proof of Euler's Formula?
[IMG]http://postimg.com/169000/eulerformula-168579.jpg[/IMG]
[sp]and my shitty LaTeX skills[/sp]
edit: already fixed the R & C. Also just noticed a line got cut off between pages 1&2 but still easy enough to follow
I think you need more punctuation.
I also find it strange that you'd end a sentence, start a new line which contains just a formula, but not center the new line.
[QUOTE=PopLot;46189108]Thought I may as well try to learn LaTeX
What do you think of my shitty and non-rigorous proof of Euler's Formula?
[IMG]http://postimg.com/169000/eulerformula-168579.jpg[/IMG]
[sp]and my shitty LaTeX skills[/sp]
edit: already fixed the R & C. Also just noticed a line got cut off between pages 1&2 but still easy enough to follow[/QUOTE]
\mathbb{R} and \mathbb{C} give the fancy looking Rs and Cs that you usually see in the literature for the reals and complex numbers. This may require the amsmath package (if you're not using LyX, if you are it's in there already), I'm not sure. Also, a lot of standard functions like sin, cos, ln, etc. can be displayed as non-italicized text if you just write \sin, \cos, \ln, etc. Not really a critical change but helps to make if obvious it's a function and not a bunch of variables.
[editline]9th October 2014[/editline]
Oh nevermind about the R and C saw the edit now
I personally really hate when people use RIDICULOUSLY LARGE MARGINS for math. Like, how is all that whitespace helping? But I might be biased, I read a lot of math on my Kindle so I crop out everything I can for the biggest possible text on the screen. One inch margins on everything for me. Can't imagine needing more unless maybe you're leaving room for comments on a homework from a professor.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;46195640]I personally really hate when people use RIDICULOUSLY LARGE MARGINS for math. Like, how is all that whitespace helping? But I might be biased, I read a lot of math on my Kindle so I crop out everything I can for the biggest possible text on the screen. One inch margins on everything for me. Can't imagine needing more unless maybe you're leaving room for comments on a homework from a professor.[/QUOTE]
If that's directed at me I didn't even touch the margin settings lol
Yeah vanilla LaTeX tends to have huge margins, which can easily be fixed by using the fullpage package...
I use geometry instead. Can tweak to my heart's content.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.