| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Comments:
<0> If I worked on my math skills, I'd be ready for college.
<0> 1. general equivalency diploma.
<0> 2. general educational development.
<0> Sorry, I have dial up.
<1> my gmail account is getting awfully packed...
<1> "You are currently using 266 MB (10%) of your 2700 MB."
<0> I think my problem with math, is the teachers would contradict each other.
<0> Wow.
<1> how would teachers contradict each other?
<1> and what problems with math do you have?
<2> tenchiko: don't be impressed... 260 MB of that is just pictures of that Harry Potter girl
<3> It's maths! The best thing about maths is that it can't contradict itself and be correct!
<0> haha
<1> by the way, I think "math" is the wrong name for the school subject
<1> it should be "calculating", not "math"
<0> Our text books say "Math"
<3> Algebraic manipulation, however simple, isn't really calculation.
<2> our textbooks said Math too; and we did more than just calculation: we did some linear and vector algebra, differential calc, and some integral calculus and modelling in high school
<0> I can't give a good example of teachers contradicting each other, but they have.
<1> so did we, but it was still an order of magnitude less abstract than most math I've seen at university
<0> And, they do a poor job of explaining things.
<0> I do understand the concepts that have been introduced to me so far, I'm just slow at calculating them.
<0> Like, I no longer have my multiplication tables memorized.
<0> Used to, but I dont' anymore.
<1> I was really annoyed that we had to memorize formulas to solve integrals or differentials
<4> meh
<4> I think calculating things by hand is dumb :P
<4> scalar, I forget, do you like shiva or dislike it?
<0> I do think I will try to improve my math and English skills.
<2> I tried to memorize as few as possible: they tend to give you a table of standard integrals for ones not so easily derived anyway
<4> it is my personal opinion that doing most calculations on paper is a waste of human brainpower... most other people would disagree with me, though :P
<1> Xiphoris: it's not really my thing, actually. I did like the chicken dish I had there last time, though
<4> integrating by hand... bleh
<4> I see calculus as a tool I can use to solve certain problems... I don't care how the tool works enough to want to do it by hand
<0> Well, it's probably good 'excersize' for the brain
<3> Integrating should be done by hand.
<4> why?
<0> Hmm.
<2> i.e. sometimes you just end up remembering things because they stick in your head: i.e. nobody makes an effort to remember that d/dx ( u + v) = u dv/dx + v du/dx
<0> I'm not sure which books to get, though.
<3> ...because it's not a tedious or time consuming thing?
<2> s/i.e./e.g.
<4> sure it's tedious
<4> :[
<0> Most of the math I'd like to learn would have to do with 3D graphics.
<4> something like
<1> you can easily teach yourself
<4> 1/( sin(x) + x^3 )
<4> good luck integrating that by hand
<4> =P
<0> I don't have others teach me.
<1> for most 3D graphics, you don't really need much formal analytic geometry
<4> integration is a trivial algorithm, just like addition... why do it by hand when a computer can follow that algorithm instead?
<0> A bit of geomertry, and some trig
<3> Xiph, you're talking about evaluating it?
<0> damn typo
<4> Rethguals, no, algebraically integrating the indefinite integral
<4> e.g., the integral of x^2 is 1/3 * x^3
<4> what's the integral of 1/[ x^3 + sin(x)] ? :P
<4> you can't find things like that by hand
<2> why not?
<0> Where does this apply?
<4> tequilla, try :P
<1> unfortunately, computers are really only good at producing nice answers for terms that humans can also work with quite effortlessly
<2> Xiphoris: you can using stuff like approximating series, and then integrating those, no?
<1> for more complicated terms, either computers fail or produce ugly answers, whereas a human with a bit of training and insight can come up with pretty, short ones
<0> Where would this math be applicable?
<5> i never did get the hang of derivations and such of trig functions
<4> scalar, "nice" answers maybe, but computers can also produce answers where the answer would be something a human couldn't handle
<2> i.e. people say "you can't calculate square roots by hand"... but you can, if you're willing to apply Newton's method continuously to get a closer approximation
<4> and in any case
<4> in situations where the computer DOES produce a nice answer
<4> the computer also (1) doesn't make mistakes (2) does it very quickly
<4> which is why I like using them :)
<2> but why isn't it appropriate in a MATH course, to have to do integration by hand? :P
<2> especially if it's an integral calculus course
<4> I guess it's fine to learn at some point :)
<4> but I think it should be learned once then done using computers afterwards
<1> I think you should learn how to do it by hand, but not memorize the complicated formulas
<3> Calculus in my pure mathematics lessons never went any further than "here's a description of a problem, from which you should derive an equation that will need to be integrated". I'm not really in a position to argue that we should allow people to punch it into some big ol' calculator.
<2> it's the same as using Newton's method in a differential calculus course as a 1-mark question
<1> I don't think memorization plays a big role in life later
<4> yeah, I like questions like that
<4> I think that's the important part of calculus
<1> maybe for stuff like multiplication up to 12*12
<1> but not for integrating terms
<4> "solve the problem and generate an expression to be integrated"
<1> especially not ones involving cubes of trigonometric functions :P
<2> but do you have something against memorizing certain methods, scalar?
<2> e.g. integration-by-parts
<2> s/methods/techniques
<1> no, I think that's very useful
<1> of course, most of the expressions that we had to memorize could be derived that way, given enough time
<4> meh
<1> I wonder how much time I would need to reacquire one of the skills that I've proved I'm able to master but have since forgotten
<4> I would prefer a course that is targetted at engineers who look at integration as a tool.... and teaches how to perform basic integration
<1> like organic chemistry
<2> in may cases the integration by parts technique (or the substitution technique) can become faster if you memorize certain other rules etc.
<4> then simply goes from there to how to use integration to solve problems
<4> and doesn't bother to teach how do to things like complicated integration involving trig
<1> yeah, chemistry was the worst of the scientific subjects for me
<3> Xiph, I should think that integration involving trig is pretty important for an engineer.
<1> Xiphoris: you're in a course like that right now, aren't you? ;)
<2> I fared alright in hydocarbon chemistry, and the bronsted-lowry theory/lewis theory of acids and bases etc... but the rest was just Zzz
<4> scalar, hmm?
<3> Well, an electrical engineer or a physisist anyway.
<1> CAAM. it's math for scientists and engineers, basically
<4> I haven't done anything with integration since AP Calc BC in high school :P
<4> nah
<4> it's not calculus... linear algebra
<2> Xiphoris: did you cover surface integrals, double and triple integrals in that course?
<2> if not, you missed some fun!
<4> Rethguals, it's important to understand how to use it, not how to do it by hand
<4> tequilla, in high school? no.. it was single-variable calc
<4> that's as far as I've bothered to go
<4> Rice doesn't require me to have more than single-variable for my COMP degree
<2> we had to do it as part of my Engineering degree: I'm done with math now, but I've done around 5 math subjects in the first year of Eng.
<4> damn, that ****s :p
<2> but now: no more math, no more economics, no more accounting, no more physics
<4> as an engineer, I don't see myself using much math at all
<4> well, "hard" math
<2> just software, info, electronics and finance subjects
<4> obviously algebra is involved in everything
<4> and some algorithms stuff...
<4> but I probably don't even need calc
<2> when you decide to turn your MUD-like into a WoW-like you will ;)
<4> I'm a minimalist... I like being required only to know as little as possible to get the job done
<4> then specializing myself if I enjoy a subject and want to know more about it :)
<4> tequilla, why?
<4> you mean the 3D collision detection stuff?
<4> I'm sure I'd use an existing engine or package of some sort... no need to reinvent it all myself :P
<2> true
<4> that's my view though:
<4> require people know as little as possible about general subjects
<4> then require they specialize in *something*
<4> whether it be math, algorithms, error analysis, software engineering, etc.
<2> now they freak me out (in a good way)
<4> I think that's great
<4> it's awesome if people want to learn about that stuff
<4> but requiring everyone to learn things they (1) don't want to learn (2) probably won't use is a waste of resources :[
<1> ...until you know everything about nothing
<1> ;)
<2> especially since they're the ones who find/invent stuff that makes an engineer's life easier :)
<4> maybe one of them will solve P=NP :)
<1> or maybe no one ever can... frustrating, isn't it?
<4> yes :[
<1> are you in 481?
Return to
#c++
or
Go to some related
logs:
#india
wilian allbert
#allnitecafe
the angraiz movie
#allnitecafe
#linux
Dokeie
sonimayur.
lawinanet
#chat-world
|
|