/sci/ - Science & Math

Talk maths.
Previous: >>12224197

>>9779455
Not OP, but that's what I'm using ATM. it's certainly not the worst adv. math textbook I've ever had.

Can I rant for a second? Newfag to advanced math btw. Whatever happened to the glorious, 800pg, brimming-with-examples-and-solutions textbooks from the earlier math classes? I feel that if anything, a textbook w/ the characteristics I've described would be 1000x more useful now than back then when you simply just compute things all the time. But all we get are these shitty, expensive textbooks like pic-related which are brief and way too dense. Math has been around long enough and there are enough math students to where someone writing one would be profitable. Why do all upper level textbooks have to suck?

>>9427784
>>9428064
>>9428578
Different anon here. I have no designs in being like a mathematical logic guru or foundations of math wizard but I'd like to take these classes simply because I find this stuff fascinating. My only real guru is to get that math major/ comp sci minor and get my 300k starting. If I only wanna dabble, should I just peruse set theory and beyond on my spare time as opposed to taking these classes? To be frank, will taking these set theory/ math foundations classes enlarge my asshole five sizes? Or will it be an enlightening, enjoyable experience?

I am offered a lot of leeway in choosing mathematics electives courses for the second two years of my B.S. Aside from taking the required classes (lin. algebra, adv. calc 1 & 2, real analysis 1 & 2) and a few that interest me (comp. sci and number theory) I'm wondering what other paths to follow...

So /sci/, I'm curious what you guys think of the Foundations of Mathematics classes? That would be everything from the beginner level sets, logic, and proof classes to more advanced theory classes, culminating in the Foundations of Mathematics class. Is it worth it, and for whom? Is it challenging? Does it look respectable on transcripts? Or would I be better off using those electives to study PDEs or combinatorics or something that looks impressive?

Does anyone else have a difficult time switching between two different sciences? I've only recently begun to notice it since I'm taking upper level biology and maths/chemistry courses simultaneously, but I feel like if I switch between the two in one day nothing really "sticks". I need to dedicate one day to biology and one to chemistry/maths. Anyone have any advice on how to circumvent this problem?

Does anyone else have a tough time with proofs? Most of my problem solving thus far has relied on intuition rather than explicit steps. In fact, most of the time if i actually try to trace my thought process i end up getting frustrated because i cant properly figure out why the hell what ive done works. I'd like to think its not a fluke because I breezed through calculus with this intuition but now that I'm taking courses where proofs are emphasized more heavily I have no clue wtf to do.

>tfw your teachers are shit at explaining how to prove something in math, they just assume we freshmen undergrads already know
I hate the math department in my uni

>>7700227
> it doesn't provide any explanation for anything.
Okay, then I'll go with the MWI, problem solved.
You only addressed the first half of my reply though.
How does the conscious observer collapse a wavefunction? And why does it have to be conscious?

>>7371284
Not that guy, but at first I was gonna call that clouds of gas acting in a similar fashion to auroras (the red being oxygen) but that'd mean they're some big-ass clouds.
Then I googled it.
http://www.astrophotolab.com/pr/u0639.htm
So if the blue's dark matter, how did they stick it on the picture?

>>7371297
Send something in front of us, like our own big-ass rocks.

>>7189956
can anyone help?