/sci/ - Science & Math

expect a lot more proofs

>>2036154
The last time I remembered doing proofs was in geometry and I thoroughly enjoyed it. But doubt it's similar.

>>2036147
>theoretical-based mathematics

wtf, do you not understan math? All math is theoretical-based.

>>2036160
Whatever "proof" you did in highschool isnt really a proof

>>2036167
You know what I mean. Anyway, let's stay on topic, please?

what course would you say is the best predictor in ability to succeed in higher math?

and by that i mean like, if i were to IM you and say "i got an A in _______!" you would say there is a high probability of me understanding more rigorous concepts.

>>2036187
That's a good way of refining my question.

Anyone?

>>2036147
All the math you know is what we call "engineering math" or "babyshit". Ie plug and chug shit. This really isnt what mathematicans or scientist, consider real "math". Depending on what you major in college, you will either be exposed to real math (proof based) , or more babyshit (engineering nonsense). A monkey could be trained to do enginering math, but it actually takes some intellegence to do proof based math.

>>2036187

Undergraduate algebra / proof writing

>>2036187
what do you mean by higher math?
Real math or engineering math?

>>2036195
Except that you don't just PLUG AND CHUG. For simple algebra, yes you do.

Higher leveled problems involve some ingenuity.

Anyway, inb4 shitstorm.

>>2036202
I pitty the fool who thinks engineering math is a higher form of math

>>2036195
I think you need to take a grammar course. Also, it's called problem solving.

>>2036154
>>2036167
>>2036195
>>2036202
>>2036208

Too much samefagging in this thread.

If you've got the "knack" for it college math isn't very difficult.

>>2036206
>>2036210

>>2036195
Using your logic, everyone would be gettings As in "engineering math."

>>2036147
what are you thinking of majoring in?

FYI: Cal 3 is still considered shit-tier math

>>2036222
>engineers are usually dumb as fuck

some peope don't know how to plug-and chug properly....DURRRR

>>2036225
Shit tier as in easy? It's not hard, but I've taken easier math courses.

>>2036225
I'm actually interested in the arts, but I'll probably major in biology or programming. Since I'll credit out of a few courses in college, I was thinking of just filling it with higher maths in the later semesters since I'm interested in that too.

Yeah, I'm much ignorant of the higher maths because I'm still in hs. What's your major?

>Cal 3 is still considered shit-tier math

oh come on.

let's come down to earth a little bit.

a spherical ball of ice is melting at the rate of 4 cubic inches per minute. How fast is its radius changing when the radius is 3 inches

>>2036234
Lol you plug and chug in geometry? I guess you do that too in physics?

Obvious troll is obvious

math is cheese till you start knocking on the big three of analysis, algebra, topology. then you realize mathematics is the study of how we organize thought. And the only reason why it seems related to reality is because its related to how we think about reality, but itself, is a divorced world in which you keep bumping into the same structures again and again.

>>2036235
Yes, as in easy.

You are given formulas, and all you have to do is use the formulas, and do some basic manipulation. This kind of math requires no real skill, intellegence or understand. It is just about following procedure.

>>2036242
Differentiate the equation of volume for sphere. Then you solve.

Come on now, I took calc 5 years ago.

>>2036242

that is seriously easy. ffs. find the general equation of the radius, differentiate it. dV/dt = 4. solve for r = 3. fucking moron.

>>2036242
Stop spamming threads with this, we're not going to do your homework for you.

>>2036241
Basic geometry = shit tier
basic physics (usually the class the engineers take) = shit teir

It isnt until you get into Lagragain Mech that you actually start to do real physics.

does anyone else here really feel that exams and tests are irrelevant? i mean, in a real life situation, you're not going to have to remember equations off by heart...

no idea where to even start i missed the class at the end of the chapter

mathematics has the highest incidence of theists of sciences.

>>2036246
If it was so fucking easy, everyone taking math exams would be getting As ALL THE TIME. "They don't know how to plug and chug" - that doesn't even make sense.

i'll rephrase my question:

would you say, in general, that students who perform well in their undergraduate calculus, linear algebra, etc. courses (what you call "shit-tier math") tend to do better than those that do not in higher maths, or is the difficulty of such a different nature that these pre-reqs have no real predictive power.

>>2036257
Does she actually say that?

>>2036257
Engineers take advance physics, idiot. What the fuck kind of college requires basic physics for engineers?

wtf am I reading?

>>2036259
>very underage fag detected

>>2036263
It makes perfect sense. When you get to college you will understand little guy.

>>2036244
OP here. Thanks for the small insight.

Though I have a feeling that my whole thread got trolled.

>>2036266
no. most engineering students plan on getting double majors or at least minors in mathematics. In my university, I'd estimate between analysis and topology 80%+ washed out (of the engineers).

>>2036259
>implying you have to memorize equations to do well on tests
Gtfo, highschooler.

>>2036269
>Engineers take advance physics

LMAO...sure buddy....sure

>>2036275

well if anything that just makes me happy that tests will start to challenge my logical abilities and not my memorization skills. thanks you kind shrew

>>2036274
So there is no predictive power? Okay.

Also too much same fags in this thread.

>>2036282
Are you fucking kidding me? In high school, there wasn't much memorization needed for calc, precalc, or any lower maths.

God damn.

>>2036266
Linear Algebra = not shit teir math, it is proff based (if it is the real linear algebra)

Matrix Algebra = shit teir math
(some places call it linear algebra, but it is just a type of linear algebra, not the whole subject)

would you say, in general, that students who perform well in their undergraduate calculus, linear algebra, etc. courses (what you call "shit-tier math") tend to do better than those that do not in higher maths, or is the difficulty of such a different nature that these pre-reqs have no real predictive power.

>>2036293
Well, it's kind of shit tier in that even "real" linear algebra is still pretty easy. I really liked the class and the subject though.

>>2036274
>most engineering students plan on getting double majors or at least minors in mathematics

WTF? THAT IS BULLSHIT!
source? what college do you go to? I will look up the stats

>>2036300
I love how people ignore my question.

>>2036309
That's because /sci/ isn't that educated....

>>2036292

our classes aren't taken on a subject basis.

i just finished senior year, and in my courses i had complex number theory, calculus, geometry, 3d vector geometry, statistics, matrices, trigonometry and trig calculus.

our tests are based off remembering rules that we learnt in class and applying them to the same type of questions with the numbers changed. sure it tests if you understand some basic parts of the subjects, but in my view its ineffective because the teachers don't teach a broader understanding but the very specific cases that those problems occur in. i believe in projects not tests.

are your experiences similar or different?

>>2036309

i originally posted that, why did you copy it?

at least 3 people have provided serious and helpful answers.

>>2036304
maybe easy, but it isnt shit-teir.

Lets put it this way, shit-teir math is "trival". They dont publish papers on it, there is no research going on. Nothing like that.

Linear algbera is a big field, and there is still some research being done. No one is doing work regarding cal 3....lol.

would you say, in general, that students who perform well in their undergraduate calculus, linear algebra, etc. courses (what you call "shit-tier math") tend to do better than those that do not in higher maths, or is the difficulty of such a different nature that these pre-reqs have no real predictive power.


Not one single serious answer to this. We had one dubious reply that said that engineers "washed out."

>>2036315
>our classes aren't taken on a subject basis

Holyshit, you must be fucking retarded. What kind school do you go to? Is it in a very poor area?
Name?

>>2036333
To some extent. There are those that naturally, for want of a better word, "get" math with very little effort, and there are those that don't but put in the hours of study required to memorize formulas and rules without really understanding them. The former category seems to do better in higher level math, although it might also be that they're the ones who enjoy it and want to do it more.

>>2036350

aaaaccctually i remember having a conversation with an australian high school senior on here, and apparently it's not at all uncommon to learn math in this way. he learned calculus in general fits and starts, some as a sophomore, and some as a senior.

in a way, i did something similar. new york state high school math does not (or at least did not) have strictly defined "geometry class" or "trigonometry class." i took a sort of weird hybrid called Math A, and then Math B, and then "Precalc."

tl;dr probably not that uncommon.

>>2036353
Thank you.

>>2036359
That seems like a retarded way to learn. For example: let's learn a bit about biology in freshman yr! Then continue on in soph and then junior!

>>2036359
Yeah, they combine Algebra/Trig/Geometry in a lot of places.

>>2036359
>>2036350

yes guys, Australian. how is it any less effective learning maths like this than it is taking specific classes?

>>2036359
The problem is that you will never fully learn a subject that way. You are just getting random bits. That serioulsy sounds like a really fucked up way to teach kids.

>>2036391
This is how i feel: They give you bits and pieces every year, for me it's a tease. I'd like to learn more but instead I'm told "wait another year."

Besides, the information will be fresher since often kids forget information after a year.

>>2036388

but i mean... our classes have 4 hours each week, and the subjects (calc, stats, complex numbers etc) are split between the years. so we may spend 20 hours on calculus, have a test on it, then spend the next 10 hours on geometry. do Americans spend the whole year on ONE topic?

>>2036402
Usually lower level math classes are 4 hours a week, one semester.

>>2036402
Yup.
I took calcI&II equivalency for you during my sophomore year (grade 10).

Does that mean you guys don't have accelerated classes for certain topics?

It just seems easier to divide difficulty levels for students if you just have one subject of math taught each year. That way, if you are talented, you can take multiple math courses in 1 year or skip ahead.

>so we may spend 20 hours on calculus, have a test on it, then spend the next 10 hours on geometry.

oh jesus christ what

>>2036402
>complex numbers

WTF is wtf is this shit? You need to formually learn complex numbers? WTF?

>>2036411
He meant per week, I think.

>>2036415
30 hours a week is a bit much for math...

>>2036415

no, i mean through the year.

this is how classes work in my part of australia.. we pick the subjects that we want at the start of the year, theres the staple sciences (biology, chemistry, physics) shit tier sciences (psychology etc) different levels of english and about 5 different levels of maths. this way every year you take the same subject, and you do the same types of math but delve more and more deep into it with each year. so in year 12, top level maths, we study mostly different types of differential equations and systems of them, integration and applying it, and geometry. for this class there is 4 hours a week for 40 weeks, so 160 hours. that is split up between the topics, so we probably spent more around 40-60 hours (CLASS TIME) on calculus. our examinations at the end of the year are 50% of our total mark, which determines which university courses we can take. i took two maths classes, because the extension maths requires the top level maths.
>>2036412

i didnt NEED to formally learn it, it was just part of my course. faggot.

>>2036428
I see.

It seems foreign to me because I'm used to the one-subject idea. I'm sure it works out for you, but I honestly can't wrap my head around it.

>>2036431

it is shit tier. i had no idea that other countries taught in different ways, and the per topic system that you all talk about seems much more intuitive and effective. this way, i have to rote learn statistics to pass my high level maths course, and i cant pass high school unless i get another year 11 credit because i took year 12 biology in year 11. Australia's education system is a failure; luckily for everyone younger than me it is completely changing next year.

>>2036428
Its sounds like you really are just taking 5 maths a year. But they are organized by subject, is it is the same shit as other places.

DONT TRY TO FEEL SPECIAL FAGGOT! YOU ARE DOING THE SAME SHIT AS THE REST OF THE WORLD

>>2036428
Seems like it holds back very motivated or students though.

I exhausted all the math courses in my hs when I was a junior. That pretty much freed me time and I could take whatever I want.

>>2036439
Did they let you take university classes?

>>2036437
Oh wow. That sucks. At least reforming is coming, although it is a little late.

>>2036443
My adviser never informed me that I was allowed to take college maths. Only one student did that but he took political science.

But yes, in my school you are allowed to do that.

>>2036225
thy*

>>2036279
haha, I remember hearing engineers here complaining about their "statics" class.
Physics major here, feels good man.