>>7636490 I didn't have to study, most of the concepts just came to me naturally. To be completely honest, I believe that those who find themselves becoming over-stressed about their studies should find a different field. Maybe psychology or some other "softer" science? The problem with mathematics students is that some believe they can just pick it up as a skill, like basket weaving, or driving a car. But, unfortunately, the truth is that math proficiency is more of a state of mind, only achievable by those born with the gift of completely logical thinking.
Math has always been a fascinating subject for me.
One reason for this is because I was so bad at it, in the formal manner.
I could never get used to the methods, and I formulated my own way of calculating things, to meet my immediate needs. My brain was always artistic, more prone to linguistics, and math, being the most abstract of all languages, failed to inspire me.
was pretty good at competitive math while in high school competed in a few multinational competitions after placing second in my (small) country, most notably the International Math Olympiad where I got stomped obviously not on the same level as the guys that compete for team USA or Germany or China or something but I think I qualify as at least decent
nothing remarkable to tell really though just played a lot of vidya, did well in school and in high school showed up to school almost every saturday morning for olympiad practice competitions
>>7636483 >>7636504 what's your level of education? sounds like you're still in high school desu
I remember being in 2nd grade and just doing arithmetic for fun a lot. Like I'd take my books to lunch and add up all the pages in all the books, or find the average number of pages per chapter in a book, etc. It's a weird contrast to now, where even though I still enjoy math I procrastinate on my work a lot and have to pretty much force myself to get started.
>>7636546 OP here. Understand the difference between noumena and phenomena. Math is a language at the end of the day and therefore has the same same linguistic limits, and prejudices, all languages possess as a innate quality.
>>7636576 thanks for the link retard >the method of human communication, either spoken or written, consisting of the use of words in a structured and conventional way. math is not a method of human communication and does not consist of words structured in a conventional way
>mathematics is the study of topics such as quantity (numbers), structure, space, and change copied straight from wiki for your level of discourse note the complete lack of the words "communication" and "words" which are really fundamental concepts in linguistics you know
I don't know if I consider myself a "beast", but I never got less than an A when getting my comp engineering degree. Took calc 1-4, statistics for engineers, linear algebra, numerical analysis, discrete structures, and other science courses not necessarily pure math (circuits, signals and systems, electronics, physics 1-2, analysis of algorithms). People always harassed me for help and in some cases it made me stop going to class and learn the material from home. I don't think I'm gifted or anything like that, but the material is mostly very easy for me to understand and I don't have to spend much time studying to be able to make high grades on tests.
Childhood was terrible. Being around people gives me terrible anxiety. It's a big reason I went into the field I did, so I can be locked away from human interaction for the most part. I've never truly connected with a person to the point where I could live with them or whatever. I don't know where this is going, I probably sound like a retard by now, oh well.
Muh momma always told me that arithmetics was easy, that I shouldn't let myself be intimidated by large numbers, as all follow the same rules, when I got to geometry and trig, and some algebra, my mom had told me that things I see there are so for a reason, that I don't have to memorize them, just reason them, and use my logic to solve stuff.
>>7636541 Well this is going to sound autistic as fuck, and I mean REALLY autistic, but there was a pattern I liked to draw on grid paper whenever I was bored. I would start in the bottom left corner and then draw a line of one unit going up, then right, then down, then left, forming a square. Then the second iteration would be up up, up right, up down, up left, right up, etc. Pic related is what the second iteration looks like on its own. The height and width of each iteration was four times that of the previous iteration plus one (h1=1, h2=5, h3=21). Each iteration would have the same basic shape as the previous one, but more complex, so that a four time larger version of the previous iteration could be overlaid over the current iteration and they would intersect at key points. There are all kinds of recurring patterns and in later iterations it starts to exhibit self-similarity in places. Basically I thought it was cool to draw, look at and observe things about. There was never room on one sheet of paper to go past the third iteration, but I think I went a good ways into the fifth using a lot of sheets once. If this pattern is something that other people have come up with and it has a name and everything, I've never heard of it, but that would be cool.
>>7636564 Mathematics is subject to its own sorts of intonation. Under your definition, as it stands, math is nothing but notation. Obviously this is not the case.
>>7636570 Mathematics is just a collection of logical frameworks strung together, each with various logical operators (and many core ones shared). No different than English's "and" "or" "all" "if" "why" "set" "this" "that" "here" "there".
Other forms of language do not necessarily express actuality and can represent things that don't exist, as well as rough or relative approximations. Mathematics is the same same way. Square root of 2? Square root of a negative number? Arguably, negative numbers themselves? Yeah, no. Those things aren't demonstrably part of the universe. They're part of a language, and held as concepts in the particle systems that know of it. That doesn't mean they exist.
>>7636592 Language is a representation or a symbol of mental models (abstractions) and so their structure is inherently fabricated and ambiguous and incomplete and a simplification of reality: a metaphor. This is also true of mathematics, the most abstract language of all, besides music. That's how I define it. Carrry on.
>>7636615 you're just defining abstract objects = language which is ridiculous
if I dig up a really old math proof from Euclid's time where they wrote almost everything in plain Greek with very little "notation" they're writing about math in Greek they're not writing math using Greek
see the difference?
in pure math there is no difference between complex irrationals and natural numbers when it comes to their abstraction both are 100% abstract and have nothing to do with the real world but that doesn't automatically mean that discussing them involves some mystical "math language"
>>7636633 The idea of something being "abstract" is itself ambiguous and doesn't lend well to a meaningful definition.
>see the difference? It's a Greek writing math. If the Greek is writing about mathematical axioms, then they're writing about math in Greek. If the more modern Greek writes about English, they're writing about English in Greek.
Language is just a means of describing things and conveying meaning. Its limit is tied to the limits of the system trying to use or expand it. Just like math. You parse sentences and evaluate them according to context, you parse equations and evaluate their variables according to context.
Answer me this, anon. Would you say math, its processes, and its results, convey meaning? Would you call math logical?
>>7636652 >Would you say math, its processes, and its results, convey meaning? Would you call math logical? obviously
>The idea of something being "abstract" is itself ambiguous and doesn't lend well to a meaningful definition. nonsense, it has been discussed in philosophy and half of Plato's work are on it, written 2400 years ago
fun (but little known) fact, while Plato is not famous for his contributions to math he was one of those who really influenced math's status as a 100% abstract subject although that idea didn't really be the dominant one until millennia later
>>7636552 >math is not a language you retarded fucks, stop spouting this stupid meme
logics-mathematics is nothing but the process of abstraction and the manipulation of the abstract objects, resulting from the abstraction, according to rules of inferences that WE CHOOSE from our abstraction of our daily life.
Logic is the highest form of abstraction. mathematics is too applied.
>>7636669 Plato put forward the exact opposite. His ideas were an evolution of the more ancient notion of a "monad", that mathematical objects were discrete and not abstract in their true forms. I'm not sure if you mean that the idea of math existing on an abstract plane rose in contrast to it, making his contribution indirect.
>obviously While I don't believe logic and language are truly intertwined in an absolute sense, I do think they're closely coupled. What makes you so resistant to the idea of math being a form of language? Even the devices and systems we're using to communicate as we speak, are driven by the language math. Billions of transistors strung together. The output it generates has meaning and order. It conveys meaning.
Affordance is language. Reaction, is language. Action, is language. Math, is just part of a broader thing that is language. At least as far as we can be concerned.
>>7636479 I used to be a constructivist, but now I am a classical, if I must be. Math is just pure imagination, which is blatant from the formal logics. since imagination is disconnected from the empirical world, if you truly want to use your imagination, do it full-on and be a classical guy. to be a constructivist in math is to claim that there is a link imagination -> sensations, just like the mathematician believes that there is a link, which we call abstraction, sensations -> imagination permitting to categorize our sensations. Of course, the mathematician cannot prove that the concepts that he produces tie back to the sensations, are relevant wrt the sensations. the rationalist takes the reason seriously as relevant in life, he thinks that the reason/rationality is not a subset of the imagination, but given the diversity of logics, he is not able so far to defend his thesis since de facto, there are several logics.
the classical guy acknowledges that classical math through classical logic is disconnected from the sensations -- which can be seen with the contrived notion of truth taken as validity of statements in classical logic, instead of the justification of constructivist math -- so he has the right to do anything that he wants, within the framework of the classical logic that he imagined. of course, his notion of truth is really dubious. The problem of the mathematician/logician is in one word why does he do math/logic ? Why does he think that math/logic is relevant, is worth doing ? He has no clue, beyond some vague fantasy of ''explaining the world''. of course, he has no idea what ''explaining'' means
To be a constructivist is really to be a rationalist and to claim to be an empiricist at the same time in order to to avoid the criticism that the work of the constructivist is pure speculation/metaphysics/non-sense, just like in philosophy.
>>You will find no such Math beasts here, only 20 somethings with nothing better to do with their lives, masturbating to their own non existent superiority. Math beasts are either discussing Math, doing Math or doing anything better with their time than being on this thread.
>>7636689 because this definition offers nothing of value to the philosophy of mathematics and makes language a needlessly convoluted term when there's a well established accepted definition which absolutely relies on the central concept of communication to the point of being inseparable which has nothing to do with math or logical systems
and you seem not to understand of have read anything of Plato Plato was of the idea that mathematical entities and objects are fundamentally and eternally abstract and we can only work with caricatures of their true forms hence the cave thingy
>How do you mean?
>I mean, as I was saying, that arithmetic has a very great and elevating effect, compelling the soul to reason about abstract number, and rebelling against the introduction of visible or tangible objects into the argument. You know how steadily the masters of the art repel and ridicule any one who attempts to divide absolute unity when he is calculating, and if you divide, they multiply, taking care that one shall continue one and not become lost in fractions.
>That is very true
>Now, suppose a person were to say to them: O my friends, what are these wonderful numbers about which you are reasoning, in which, as you say, there is a unity such as you demand, and each unit is equal, invariable, indivisible, --what would they answer?
also speaking of ill-defined and ambiguous concepts >Affordance is language. Reaction, is language. Action, is language. I mean what the hell is this even supposed to mean
this whole reddit popmath bs should stay in reddit
>>7636706 >relies on the central concept of communication Which is an obvious attribute of math. And, quite literally, everything we know of or will ever encounter. The delineation between language and "other stuff" you're describing is not only arbitrary, but built on an illusion. I understand you might find it's not a useful mental tool, but that doesn't actually change anything.
Using your logic, at such a point, talking to yourself is not using language. Writing something down for future reference, keeping records, constructing a drawing to convey something spatial at a later date, also, not language?
>I mean what the hell is this even supposed to mean I think you can handle piecing it together on your own. If not, feel free to ask more targeted questions.
>>7636479 The intellectual movement with which Hartshorne is associated is generally referred to as process theology. The roots of process thinking can be found in the Greek philosopher Heraclitus. Contemporary process philosophy arose from the work of Alfred North Whitehead, while Hartshorne is identified as the seminal influence on process theology that emerged after World War Two.
The key motifs of process philosophy are: empiricism, relationalism, process and events.
The motif of empiricism in process thought refers to the theme that experience is the realm for defining meaning and verifying any theory of reality. Unlike classical empiricism, process thought takes the category of thinking beyond just the human senses of perception. Experiences are not confined to sense perception or consciousness, and there are pre-sensual, pre-conscious experiences from which consciousness and perception derive.
The motif of relationalism refers to both experiences and relationships. Humans experience things and also experience the relationship between things. The motif of process means that all time, history and change are in a dynamic evolutionary process. The final motif of events refers to all the units (organic and inorganic) of the world.
While Hartshorne acknowledges the importance of Whitehead's philosophy on his own ideas, he did not entirely agree with Whitehead. In Hartshorne's process theology God and the world exist in a dynamic, changing relationship. God is a 'di-polar' deity. By this Hartshorne meant that God has both abstract and concrete poles. The abstract pole refers to those elements within God that never vary, such as God's self-identity, while the concrete pole refers to the organic growth in God's perfect knowledge of the world as the world itself develops and changes. Hartshorne did not accept the classical theistic claim of creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing), and instead held to creatio ex materia (creation out of pre-existent material).
>>7636756 One of the technical terms Hartshorne used is pan-en-theism, originally coined by Karl Christian Friedrich Krause in 1828. Panentheism (all is in God) must be differentiated from Classical pantheism (all is God). In Hartshorne's theology God is not identical with the world, but God is also not completely independent from the world. God has his self-identity that transcends the earth, but the world is also contained within God. A rough analogy is the relationship between a mother and a fetus. The mother has her own identity and is different from the unborn, yet is intimately connected to the unborn. The unborn is within the womb and attached to the mother via the umbilical cord.
Hartshorne reworked the ontological argument for God's existence as promulgated by Anselm. In Anselm's equation, "God is that than which no greater can be conceived." Anselm's argument used the concept of perfection. Hartshorne accepts that by definition God is perfect. However, Hartshorne maintains that classical Christian theism has held to a self-contradictory notion of perfection. He argues that the classical concept of God fails. Hartshorne posited that God's existence is necessary and is compatible with any events in the world. In the economy of his argument Hartshorne has attempted to break a perceived stalemate in theology over the problem of evil and God's omnipotence. For Hartshorne, perfection means that God cannot be surpassed in his social relatedness to every creature. God is capable of surpassing himself by growing and changing in his knowledge and feeling for the world.
Hartshorne acknowledged a God capable of change, as is consistent with pandeism, but early on he specifically rejected both deism and pandeism in favor of panentheism, writing that "panentheistic doctrine contains all of deism and pandeism except their arbitrary negations".
>>7636757 Hartshorne did not believe in the immortality of human souls as identities separate from God, but explained that all the beauty created in a person's life will exist for ever in the reality of God. This can be understood in a way reminiscent of Hinduism, or perhaps Buddhism's Sunyata (emptiness) ontology[dubious – discuss] namely that a person's identity is extinguished in one's ultimate union with God, but that a person's life within God is eternal. Hartshorne regularly attended services at several Unitarian Universalist churches, and joined the First Unitarian Universalist Church in Austin, Texas.
In primary school my math teacher hated her job and was not fit for it. She made fun of kids when they couldn't answer correct and generally went about teaching it in the worst way possible. She was also incredibly old and just mental.
Until after I failed hs and math over and over I decided I wanted to study to get into college and math turned out to be an alright thing after all. You just need determination and in my case loaded parents.
I owe all my knowledge in math to my dad, I don't think I'd have the patience to deal with a cunt kid like me.
So yeah you just need to study math a lot and when you think you earned a break you need to study more.
I remember the first time I really started to like math was when I had to learn matrices and matrix operations it was hard as balls but satisfying to learn.
Thanks for reading blog post I think everyone needs to make blog posts every now and then.
>>7636524 Lucky you. We never had olympiad practice sessions. The only thing that came close was one period of Physics olympiad cramming on Friday nights. Sometimes I wonder where I would've been now if I had a 'mentor' who could help me make it to the maths olympiads.
I was always very interested in maths, and it has always been somewhat intuitive for me. That being said, I was never what you would call a hard working student
>inb4 le smart but lazy may-may
Now that I am a student (4th year, masters undergrad) I still struggle to make myself do my work, but once I start I can happily do 5-6 hours work straight without a break. I don't go to my lectures but instead have 1-1 sessions with my personal tutor, at his request, once a week. These are not course related, but more to discuss areas of Mathematics outside of my courses which I have been self-teaching.
I want to do a second masters next year, then a PhD, but not at my current uni, and I don't have the heart to tell my tutor because he has been so good to me for the past 2 years.
Semi Math Beast here. I'm 100% sure I could learn all of multivar from scratch in 3 days. Same with diff. eq, maybe 4 days for diffy cause the material doesn't have as good online resources. Idk if this is peculiar but I can easily read 100+ pages of a college textbook the day before the test and do great on the test.
>>7636504 That's only true to a certain extent; Pure mathematics is more dependant on natural ability, however the average person can become "decent" at it, and by that I mean get through a few undergraduate courses in pmath, however the more intense it becomes the better you must be at being able to understand the abstract. I personally really enjoy pure math, however I am more suited for applied math, mainly physics as I understand the concepts more easily and enjoy it much, much more; Do I enjoy it more because I have an easier time with it or do I have an easier time with it because I enjoy it? Who knows, the point is that you cannot say that you have to have a natural talent to be in the field, that's like saying if you can't compose music then you shouldn't get into the musical arts, but what if they are amazing players? The same can also be said for applied math, but what a lot of people don't understand is that you will struggle to some degree and that's perfectly natural and honestly I somewhat pity those who just understand it all and never feel the joy of that "aha!" moment once it finally clicks. And once that moment comes, people generally have a much better time with the subject, be it one single course or any field general.
TLDR; You don't need to be a savant to study math however knowledge of theorems and examples can only get you so far.
I agree that math is a language, but I also believe that it is discovered as in the relations which arise from the current axioms of mathematics.
The math we currently know is entirely incomplete and possibly needs to be reconstructed from the ground up. I have issues with the existence of "undecidable" problems. I will assume that in proving the existence of such problems it is implied that pure logic is unable to solve them and so logic itself isn't 100% pure.
Originally was an above average high school student. Flunked out of uni because of panic attacks, started meditating and now im only in calc 1 but Im the number 1 student of my prof of her 3 calc classes. Started studying integrals on my own but those rational functions are giving me a bit of grief right now.
I was really bad in math in school because i wanted to be a cool lazy dude and my teacher was a massive asshole. then i finished my school and was interested in programming. so i went studying computer science. in the whole bachelor i would have like 6 modules only with math. i started learning all the basics again in my first semester and some weeks before it. math is mostly a chaining of knowledge. if you dont know the basics in algebra and analysis you cant move on. so go back to the basics then move on. i did a very good degree.
>>7637243 >i could if you don't already know babby tier engineering math there's no way you can know if you're good at math. really, talent is a very small part of it. the talent required to be the best of the bunch at lower levels isn't as impressive as you might think. work hard and challenge yourself or you're going to regret it
my dad did drugs and was never around i spent a lot of time at daycares in my youth mom didnt give me affection played video games my whole life sought social interaction in the internet at a young age started using drugs in high school depression in early adulthood anxiety now graduating with pure math degree next semester life will probably end with suicide
>>7636610 yo i made this for you in [spoiler]gamemaker[/spoiler] http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=18767631356421828366 i guess it'd be easy in some pattern generation software, but i dont have time (or will) to look after it
mathfag here, what sparked my love of math started in 3rd grade when this super strict asian teacher forced us to remember the multiplication chart and taught us how to multiply numbers. that eventually lead to solving equations being rewarding and now i'm a free lance C++/C# coder.
>>7636541 I do license plates, differences in winning lottery numbers, and my check out change (cashiers hate this) just to keep a sharp mind. Not a mathfag, but definitely see and apply math constantly. Also license plates
>>7636504 >I don't have to study High Schooler detected. Go to MIT and look at the "prodigies" struggle with advanced math concepts. You're just a fedora who thinks he knows anything about maths. You have to study, even if you're a "genius". The math is only for geniuses is a meme.
senior year pure math major here,applying to Econ phds for Metrics/asymptotics/theory.
i like pure math and proving shit but it can get very demotivational when i dont feel comfortable in a topic after weeks of studying. math is very humbling. currently taking topology and after doing first half of Munkres, we moved on to manifolds. shit breh... wtf. i guess ive just never seen this kinda stuff before. same for commutative algera. wtf. i guess we all reach a wall that it all becomes impossible and you gotta keep pushing day in day out.
my childhood was nice, bunch of books/encyclopedias and windows 95 golf games and later, roller coaster tycoon and runescape.
i enjoyed reading about geography since 2nd grade.
other than that, i had a normal childhood excluding the fact that i got straight As through college. then Analysis came lol.
Math M.S. here I'm mostly here because I like problem sets. Not exactly sure how good I'll do on my PhD when I have to imagine my own problems but I'm okay so far.. I had a normal childhood, I programmed a little in high school and it really helped me understand functions and variables. After that, I looked up stuff on the internet about math, bought books and started working
>>7636504 I think it's more about what you like than what you are made for. If you really like math, then you don't have to force yourself to learn, you just do it for fun. Just like the people binge-watching tv shows. If you have to force yourself to do math, then maybe you are lying to yourself that you like it. Many people do, because math is fetishized in the society. Just think about it - there can't possibly be as many people genuinely liking math as there claim to be. Would there be as many, if being passionate about it wouldn't involve all of the benefits math gives?
Now that I think about it, it works just like love. Using that analogy, you don't have to be a 10/10 human being to create a fruitful relationship.
It was beautiful watching faggots like you come to university, after "lol I didn't even study" exam scores of As and Bs at A Level, crash and burn in the face of university level maths. First year grades were poor, second year grades.. Well let's just say that the best of them will be lucky to graduate at all, let alone with honours.
its hard to explain, but played with a lot of technical lego, which forces you to count and calculate in a precise manner...also wrote learn tables to an automatic degree and squares etc....it kinda makes things intuitive, you can feel the way to a solution.
Like riding a bike, or swinging a racquet and hitting a ball well.
theirs a certain "weight" and sort of slotting around moving sections into places to form a solution and it gives a sort of buzz / pleasure, it has to be completed.....
Thread replies: 114 Thread images: 9
Thread DB ID: 76665
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.