/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12515480
fixed

my chart is too large (4.58mb), any way to make it under 4mb?

>>12515775
Edit the image and make it smaller

>>12515789
then you wouldn't see everything

Where to start on that physics chart if I already know rigorous maths?

>>12515480
the only chart you'll ever need

>>12515929
is this a meme or will someone with a HS level understanding of math be able to continue on and learn and understand this

>>12516212
You'll be fine. Lang is the king of pedagogy.

>>12515775
Pass it through pnggauntlet.

>>12516232
There you go

>>12516333
cool if oc

>>12516370
oc?

>>12516372
Original content

>>12516459
wouldn't put stewart

>>12516333
thank you for this, it's really nice

>>12516333
Way too many options and way overbloated

>>12516503
sounds like your mom haha

>>12515480

Any charts that aren't math

>>12516789
Let me tell you, most math charts are memes.
But all non-math charts are memes, maybe except this required readings inluding chemistry and physics >>12516766.
For instance, look this biology chart:

>>12516814
Why is this a meme chart?
I think there are better micro and biochem books but what's wrong

>>12516832
How would anybody be able to read through those optimization books without any background in calculus. Boyd's convex optimization is not just something you read after only having done linear algebra.

>>12516370
not oc, I've seen it around here before
unless that is the original creator reposting it

>>12516814
can you explain why this bio chart is a meme please

>>12516877
see >>12516460

>>12516959
all outdated.
learn complexity theory instead (21st century), when you get bored do synthesis (20th century)

>>12516776
this is what happens when you try to learn from Rudin and Jacobson first try. Learn from Tao and Pinter first then move on to graduate stuff. Use Rudin and Jacobson for reference/review of earlier stuff.

I like this type of thread. I could even make one of these graphs for chemistry one day.

>>12516814
>unnoficial

>>12516814
this >>12516766 is a meme chart too

>>12517021
Please do it anon.

>>12516864
Calculus is high school material in the civilized world.

Anyone have a financial math ('quant') chart?

>>12516998
Lol Jacobson and Rudin are just about the only books I could actually read.

>>12518144
bump

>>12517516
I agree but even for countries with calculus in high school they still teach some sort of mathematical analysis during the first year in CS degrees.
My optimization professor always said "it's high school stuff" when teaching, god bless him.

>>12516814
Are there actually any good biology charts out there?

>>12521007
try the books recommended in the /sci/ wiki (see stickied post)

>>12516741
this flows surprisingly nicely. Do you know why Shilov's books were picked instead of more standard text? I've never read him.

Are there any medic charts?!

>>12515480
I really love these threads. I've unironically used these for homeschooling.

Unironic question. But can I use that Lang meme chart to teach someone unmotivated in maths? I never tried tutoring brainlets desu.

>>12524573
dont know, but you can teach me

>>12524573
no
you can never teach someone something that they're not interested in, especially not something as technical as math
you have to make them interested in it first

>>12523602
G U Y T O N

>>12515480

>>12517021
yes yes

any charts for electronics?

>>12520208
Studies have shown that the vast majority of students around the world who are taught analysis before 18 don't understand it.
Particularly epsilon delta arguments (99.99%).
So no calculus is not "high school material"

>>12516792
never forget, people do these

>>12515480
Try a non-meme list.

>>12525876
as opposed to what

>>12526732
The charts I mean. People follow these charts, they aren't just memes to be reposted for the lulz, people try them for the lulz.

>>12516333
Howich money would it cost to buy all of these tho? Or even just all the intro boxes?

>>12516222
>>12516212
You won't be fine.

>>12516212
Every math chart is a meme, even the serious ones

>>12525876

>>12525881
That shits easy. Try spivak for a real challenge

>>12527654
Dude... buy? Libgen, torrents, etc. who buys books? what is this, the 19th century?

>>12527654
>buy
LOL are you serious? It's 2020, who buys books? Libgen, scihub, etc.

>>12529579
>>12529613
WHERE ARE YOU GETTING YOUR FUNDING

>>12529579
>>12529613
FUCKING SHILLS, WHERE ARE YOU GETTING YOUR FUNDING

>>12529621
I don't get it... who am I a shill for? What funding?

>>12527654
Nigga use b-ok.cc

nice

>>12529624
>I don't get it... who am I a shill for? What funding?
Aha! Ipse dixitum! The rhetoric of those two posts, >>12529579 >>12529613, correlates loosely with generic shill rhetoric, such as the kind you'd see from a typical astroturfing campaign with corporate backing. And yet, judging by the content of these pseudo-shilling shitposts, it is not clear who stands to benefit in any obvious way. Who would fund posts like this? Who could afford to do so? None of the usual suspects, it would seem counter-productive.

But two obvious shill posts in rapid succession, merely dozens of minutes apart? It cannot be coincidence...

Is it espionage by sci-hub?

Perhaps it is predictive programming by the book publishers, setting the stage for the impending false flag?

It seems paradoxical to the curious anon. Where do these two obvious shills find money to spread negative propaganda about the book publishers.

Who was this book written for? Freshmen? Sophomores?

>>12529711
I posted them. I had a bunch of tbs open, and I thought it was two different people talking about buying books. WHy are so many 4chan peeps insane?

>>12529822
It's obviously a joke, dude, an artistic work of fiction. Creative writing. Fucking hell, why are so many 4chan peeps so new?

>>12529721
I guess a sophomore could read it, the better your background the more you'll get out of it though.

Openstax

ugh
anything for Chemistry and electronics?

>>12531990
sedra&smith microelectronic circuits if you want to git gud at transistor circuits

Any charts on economics and finance (business oriented)?
>because IM G-GONNA STARTOOOP

>>12516986
why?

>>12532233
nobody cares about philosophy nowadays, just various ways to profit

>>12527654
As much as internet and electricity costs.

>>12525876
Tao is a meme.

>>12515815
The basics.

>>12532595
Rec chart for books that define real numbers with a satisfactory definition?

>>12532595
Define the natural numbers, fuckface.

>>12525299
No, you have to do Jackson.

How long would it take to read and do all the exercises in some of these charts?
I would imagine at least 5-6 years of full-time, intense study of around 8-10 hours a day.
Can any masters or Ph.Ds give me an estimate on this? I am thinking about quitting my job and going back to school to learning math since I don't have the time to do more than about an hour of math a day.

>>12515929
im just a sci-fi writer. should I learn math? How much effort does it take?

>>12515615
how much math would i need to learn to read these books as well? Anything for dummies like me?

>>12515791
i thought the people on this board were smart

>>12534768
>im just a sci-fi writer. should I learn math?
no, just learn highschool physics

>>12534673
>How long would it take to read
Assuming you're taking notes, doing some exercises for comprehension, you could do it in your spare time in 6-12 months

>and do all the exercises
No one actually does all the exercises, it's just a lie lecturers tell you to motivate you to work more. It would take you at least a year

>>12535272
Smarter.

Unfortunately the bar is set pretty low.

>>12516212
> will someone with a HS level understanding of math be able to continue on and learn and understand this

Kek, even post-docs don't understand all of this, just dive right in anyway anon

>>12527654
>buy

>>12516333
Way too overloaded and filled with redundancies, e.g. you don't need all 14 of those books to understand Euclidean and Non-Euclidean geometry, you only need about 2, the other 12 just rehash the same stuff

>>12515480
I come from the UK and this chart is pretty similar to our curriculum. Is Young and Freedmann just the standard intro book everywhere?

>>12536317
I feel like this is sarcasm.

>>12515480
Can I start with Taylor if all I did for physics before was AP Physics in high school and thought it was ez?

>>12536786
If your course was calculus based then yeah

>>12534431
truly a rite of passage

>>12535048
>remove africa and middle east shitholes
>suddenly 0 correlation

>>12537894
>remove the data that follows the trend and there's no trend
This might be an early finalist for dumbest /sci/ post of 2021.

Besides that idiocy
>there is clearly a trend with Latin America
>there is clearly a trend with Asia-Pacific
>North America is n=3, but there's still a trend
>Europe is about flat, since pretty much every country has low religiosity

>>12515480
if I want to learn the basic of mechanical engineering, where should I start? I only have highschool math and I never touched calculus.

>>12538899
1. stewart calculus
2. david lay linear algebra
3. boyce differential equations
4. hibbeler statics & dynamics
5. hibbeler mechanics of materials
6. callister materials science
7. frank white fluid mechanics
8. cengel thermodynamics
9. sadiku electric circuits
10. juvinall machine component design
11. ogata control engineering
12. donald engineering economics
13. bergman heat and mass transfer

Anyone have experience with University Physics? I'm thinking about studying it from start to finish before my undergraduate studies.

>>12540190
holy shit, man. I just want to build stuff I don't want be a math scientist.

>>12538899
go to college and take your prerequisites

>>12540328
Not >>12540190 but Calculus from Stewart should be enough for an introductory course in Classical mechanics.

>>12540331
>>12540190
I was joking, thanks, anons. I will check the one about calculus.

>>12540321
Good standard introductory textbook. I think the waves and thermodynamic chapters were rather weak but it's freshman physics anyway.

>>12534301
Strings consisting of symbol "|".
For example, the natural number 1 is |, the natural number 5 is |||||.

is there a chart for game theory?

which books do i need to read to get a job with maximal income to effort ratio

>>12534768
>im just a sci-fi writer. should I learn math? How much effort does it take?
As a sci-fi writer, you should know more science than your intended audience.

>>12534768
>im just a sci-fi writer. should I learn math? How much effort does it take?
just read popsci and futurologists and let your imagination run wild. maybe some entries from the SEP as well

Need a stats chart.
Also one for optimization.

>>12542381
just read all the books by the two berts and call it a day

>>12542676
I don't understand this reply. Can you be more specific please.

postan in epic thread

can't remember if it's /sci/ related because the font is so tiny

Someone should make a chart catered for rigorous CS.

>>12541280
What is the difference between | and |||||? You haven't shown that they are well-defined. You must prove that | is different from |||||.

>>12538654
>>12535048
Correlation != causation

>>12542869
The authors bertsekas and bertsimas. Sort of a joke reply, because they have (between the two of them) written books on most of what would be considered the core subjects of optimization. The Bertsimas book on linear programming is actually quite good and is the go to book for an introduction to optimization at most places. The Bertsekas nonlinear optimization is also pretty good, but debatably worse than nocedal and wright's book on the same subject imho. There is also a discrete optimization book by one of the two (can't remember which one) that I hear is decent (I haven't used that one myself), but in general the Nemhauser + Wolsey book(s) are the gold standard for a first course.

>>12543896
OK, thanks.

>>12536329
>Kek, even post-docs don't understand all of this

>>12532194
Also read "The Lean Startup" and take in depth notes. Get familiar with lean manufacturing and other systems to maximize efficiency and eliminate waste like the Japanese. I urge you to study the Toyota manufacturing plants and all of the developments in business practice that came out of it.

>>12516761
This would be a comfy exploratory 1st year of college.

>>12516761
why on earth is astrophysics a required reading

>>12544212
>exploratory
Gayyyyyyyyy

>>12542986
higher quality version please

>>12516959
Went through a lot of this a few years back. It's not bad. Highly recommend both Rothbard's in the green, even if you're not a libertarian. Against Intellectual Property and Economics in One Lesson are great as well. Man Economy and State is honestly not good, though Power and Market is okay. Hoppe is great as usual but really should be in the proficient section. The Ethics & Law section path is weak--not surprising as that's the ideology's weakness in general; Ancaps desperately need an ethicist.

>>12543601
They're the same thing.

>>12544204
Jesus Christ, this is like the pop-biz bible. I can just feel my unjustified ego rising and portfolio value falling just by looking at this

>>12544204
I read "One Up On Wall Street" and it was basically just a boomer bragging about all the money he made on his awesome trades. It could be summed up with "buy low, sell high". Complete waste of time.

>>12547582
Can you explain in detail what you mean by this.

>>12547929
He doesn't mean anything. He just wants to make unsubstantiated talk like the rest of /sci/. It's actually a good guide. Most of the business books (aside from the textbooks) are biographical in nature and give you light hearted accounts into events. They're supposed to be intuitive not autistically quantitative. That's what the textbooks are for. The self-help books are just that, self-help.

Trust me when I tell you that no one on this board run a successful business or looks over a successful investment portfolio with stocks they picked on their own let alone know how to value a company based on future cash flows.

>>12547887
>peter lynch
>just a boomer
kek you stupid faggot you deserve to stay poor
stay in your /sci/ hugbox faggot

>>12548962
I know who he is, retard. Why else do you think I bought the book? I'm just saying his book was worthless, as it was 20% vague, common sense advice a six year old could give you, and 80% self-promotion. And honestly, shame on me for even entertaining the idea that someone like that would share his secrets with the masses. The only way to really make money trading stocks over the long term (i.e. not gambling) is through networking and insider knowledge.

>>12516503
Looks like professor references and solution manual substitutes, definitely doesn't know how to pick books. Sommerville's non-eucledian geometry was also pretty good

>>12545557
dude stars lmao

Openstax.org

>>12529579
imagine reading digitally lmao