[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 94 KB, 396x385, 410297062.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6741391 No.6741391 [Reply] [Original]

>self studying math properly, was never taught it 'properly' at school
>download a pdf of a textbook with good reviews
>the language is obfuscated making understanding it a pain

I understand the need for 'formality' in math, but why does it have to get in the way of getting the point across?

How does /sci/ deal with it?

>> No.6741399

>>6741391
It doesn't. You just aren't used to it.

What book did you download anyway?

>> No.6741402

Sounds like your self study of math went up at most baby calc.

>> No.6741405

why would you self study math

nobody does that

>> No.6741408

>>6741405
I do that.

>> No.6741414

>>6741399
I went on to Amazon and found an undergrad text with good reviews.

Bear in mind I did take A level maths + some further maths, but I haven't touched it in a few years.

Ended up going for:
Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering 3rd ed

>>6741402
pls don't hate on me /sci/ I'm trying my hardest ;_;

>> No.6741452

bump for interest

>> No.6741467

>>6741391
failed mathematician turned code monkey here.

formalness of the current textbooks is a relatively new trend, and if you go back to 1950s and earlier you'll find a ton of books that teach mathematics in the fucking prose, with examples and intuitions, personal anecdotes and ramblings. my favorite here is "mathematics its content method and meaning" from dover publishing. one of the great things about that book is that it has an extensive bibliography to follow. most of which you can download from archive.org legally and free, due to it being so goddamn old.

>> No.6741468

>>6741405
>Nobody does it.
>Therefore it is wrong.
Argumentum ad populum in effect.

>> No.6741485

>>6741467
Thanks anon, I'll look at 'mathematics its content method and meaning'.

>> No.6741674

>>6741467
>mathematics its content method and meaning
my god can we please turn this thread into God-tier old school textbooks and their ludicrously good pedagogy?

>Foundations in analysis.
In which Landeau manages to construct rigourously the number system up to complex numbers in a discussion-oriented way.
That book had no right being as entertaining and straight to the point as it was.

Why the hell people stopped making books that way?
Does anybody of a graph theory equivalent?

>> No.6741704

>>6741467
Why did this trend start anyway?
I've always thought that math books are incredibly boring and thus hard to focus on because of their dry robotic narrative.

>> No.6741724

>>6741674
fucking landau! that book is mind boggling. I have a linear algebra book written in that style as well. I wish I knew what other ancient textbooks are worth checking out.

Pinter's abstract algebra is very prosey, it's from the late 70s or something though.

>> No.6741839

>>6741724
Seriously I feel a small collection of textbooks covering each subject would be a pertinent contribution to the wiki.

As to why was this style left to die? I can only speculate..

Writing lowly texts (introductory, undergrad-friendly, pedagogical) is a lost art. The intellectual prestige associated with the word teacher keeps dropping as the years go by.
No wonder the likes of Feynman were adored, not only his forays into physics managed to left a long lasting trace but he went the extra mile and clearly took pedagogy as an equivalent challenge (lectures on physics, computation & Roger commission work on the Challenger incident)

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/51-l/docs/rogers-commission/Appendix-F.txt

>> No.6741846

>>6741704
hard to tell.

may be the sheer amount of material they have to cover these days or editors pressure to keep things simple. i don't know.

>> No.6742166

On the topic of textbooks, what does /sci/ think of Lang's "Introduction to Linear Algebra" ?

>> No.6742176

>>6741405
I self study math with great success. I almost never go to lectures or exercise classes (only occasionally to socialize and meet my friends), studying by mself with the given material is much more efficient because I can progress at my own pace and satisfy my personal needs.

Can't speak for everyone but for me self study is by far the best way to learn math. The major issue is that you need good material, that's why you should still go to a notable uni - or you end up like OP, who seems to know shit about scientific notation because he's too incompetent for proper self study.

>> No.6742265

>>6742176
can you describe your method?
Seriously like, in detail.

How do you parse complicated texts? Do you do for depth first or do you go back to it?

How do you sustain long study sessions?

How do you organize and backtrack to check your memory?

How much rote work, exercies do you do?

How do you deal with concepts, proofs you can't do?

>> No.6742285

>>6742176
Why are you such an ass?

>> No.6742313

>>6742265
>can you describe your method?
Seriously, there's nothing special to it. I sit down, open the folder with all the PDFs, grab a paper block with pen and study. For most courses I also print a summary with all formulas. Usually it's dozens of pages full of different formulas, with paper it becomes much easier to navigate and you can also spread them all over your desk, instead of alt tabbing and stuff like that. I use one monitor for exercises and a second monitor for other stuff, from solutions and scripts to internet browsing.

I always start with exercises. If I can't progress, usually right away, I look at the solutions and search for related material in lecture notes, scripts, summaries and so on.

I never read complete books. For me this is pretty useless. I don't memorize anything and learn little for the amount of time it takes to go through those thick books. I only look up specific things, usually the order is summary > lecture notes > script > books > internet as desperate last resort. This way I maximize efficiency and only get relevant info with a context so it actually makes sense.

Again, exercises are by far the most important. When I was still in high school, I never solved a single exercise outside of exams because I thought that theory is all that matters in my juveline naiveté. With more advanced math and physics this won't work anymore, at least for me and pretty much everyone I know.

You don't understand it, you get USED to it by solving lots of exercises. I can't stress this enough, exercises are the key.

>How do you parse complicated texts? Do you do for depth first or do you go back to it?
I go back to it and dig deeper every time. Go for depth first and you won't get it.

>How do you sustain long study sessions?
I try to take frequent breaks. Music without vocals you can understand helps when you become exhausted. For me this is fast paced EDM and touhou to pep me up with energy.

>> No.6742328

>>6742313
This is essentially what I do, although I'm in pure math so I rarely need dozens of formulas, and I use strictly paper books as I get distracted on the computer. The core thing is to do an ungodly number of exercises. As a professor once put it to me, you don't learn math in a lecture, you learn it when you sit down with a pen and paper and start practicing. the lecture is there to prime you and give you a sense of direction.

>> No.6742337

Can some more anon share their process in detail?

This thread gets more useful by the second.

>> No.6742338

>>6742265
>How do you organize and backtrack to check your memory?
What do you mean? I don't understand the question.
You don't have to memorize anything in math and physics, you have to understand it, which is much more difficult btw no matter how complex and countless the formulas. I go over the same stuff several times, not to memorize but to better understand. Where I study at least, every single exercise is different so memorisation wouldn't help anyway.

>How much rote work, exercies do you do?
It's the core of my self studying and essential if you want to increase efficiency.
I repeat: I do everything together and combine theory with exercise for much higher efficiency than if you'd do them individually.

>How do you deal with concepts, proofs you can't do?
I skip them right away and come back later. Usually I will 'understand' them in a sense that I have a rough feeling of what's going on. If still not, I judge their importance and if it's important enough, I will ask other people, friends, assistants, professors. This happens rarely though.

>>6742285
>Why are you such an ass?
Because I enjoy it.

>> No.6742343

Anyone know a good readable book on Mathematical Logic? I'll be taking a course soon and would like to study a bit.

>> No.6742353

>>6742338
>What do you mean? I don't understand the question.

Well, I often find myself in the weird situation of vaguely remembering I studied a particular proof or theorem earlier in the semester or last year and have to fucking go back to because I simply forgot the concept.

It's extremely frustrating. Also, I tend to sieve the blunt compuitational-oriented formulas making me really mediocre at solving Diff Equs for some Linear algebra exercises.

Makes me lose a lot of time on stuff I already know.

>> No.6742354

>>6742328
>As a professor once put it to me,
One of my profs once compared it to sex. You can learn as much theory as you want, you still won't know how sex feels like if you never do it.

This comparison is actually better than you might believe. Solving exercises is not only more useful, it's also more fun than trying to understand a complex formula and the theoretical concept behind it for hours to no success. Nothing's more frustrating than feeling utterly helpless and stupid, always shatters my giant ego. In QFT for example I couldn't even solve most of the exercises with the indepth master solution on my first try, sitting down on theory won't do shit.

>> No.6742364

>>6742353
Sounds like you don't solve enough exercises. After I have solved a specific type of exercise successfully, I can perfetly replicate it in the rare case I see it a second time. If I forgot something from long time ago, I simply look at a relevant exercise and the master solution and quickly remember the concepts.

If I look at the theory, I have forgotten almost everything again by the next day.

>> No.6742374

>>6742364
mm i see. I'll try to balance with more problems & exercise.

I do tend to spend the bulk on my time on proofs and examples.

>> No.6742378

>>6742343
I liked Enderton's book.

>> No.6742380 [DELETED] 
File: 74 KB, 330x503, 1395911100425s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6742380

>>6741391
thats how the world works.
p.s. pretentiousness

>> No.6742381

>>6742338
I don't like you.

>> No.6742401

I read textbooks daily. It took a few months of "practice" (reading a little each day, and gradually increasing the workload bit by bit--all of this was unintentional). The trick is to find one topic you think is cool and just put everything you have into it (for me it was group theory). If you can only focus an hour a day a few days a week do it. Eventually, you will feel like putting in more time (and if you don't, find a different hobby that is more fun for you).

As for terse textbooks, you should read around before you settle on a textbook. Some are meant as reference texts (for people who already know the subject to look up things quickly); others are intended for first-time readers. The difference is night and day.

>> No.6742405

Im in the same boat as you bro, downloaded a textbook and started teaching myself the math beacuse in high school i was lazy and decided to do the easy math subject.

I downloaded Serge Lang's text book, which while being recommended by /sci/ and has been the basic text since it came out in the 70's, but that probs wont help you, as i find it hard to read at times, espically when i first started working through it.

Id suggest either persevering through the one you have, and it should get easier as you work through it as i found with mine, or find another textbook for basic college math that was written recently.

>> No.6742419

>>6741414
Boas is shit. I don't want to be hard on you, but that's hardly rigorous math, it's more of an advanced plug n chug textbook.

>> No.6742459
File: 629 KB, 601x851, CalculusKlineCover.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6742459

anybody her read this?

I bought it based on some reviews, but I'm not sure what should hope to learn from this book. I've taken a basic calculus class before.

>> No.6742472

>>6742459
Why would you buy a textbook you never opened and on material you (presumably) already know?

>> No.6742475

>>6742472
It was cheap as fuck and I got a C in the class

>> No.6742803

>>6741724
hey anon would you mind if you drop your old school linear algebra book's name? thx!

>> No.6742808

I cry myself to sleep and keep reading it until I do understand.

>> No.6743233

bump in quest for readable textbooks

>> No.6744415

Bump

>> No.6745002

>>6741724
>>6741839
>>6741846
>>6743233
There are still wonderful textbooks, for example "Completely Bounded Maps and Operator Algebras" by Paulsen, "Real and Functional Analysis" by Lang, "A Classical Introduction to Modern Number Theory" by Ireland and Rosen, "K-Theory and C*-algebras" by Wegge-Olsen, "Representations of Finite and Compact Groups" by Simon, "Advanced Linear Algebra" by Roman, "Elementary Analysis: The Theory of Calculus" by Ross, "Lectures and Exercises on Functional Analysis" by Helemskii, "Algebra: Chapter 0" by Aluffi, "A First Course in Abstract Harmonic Analysis" by Folland, "Introduction to Topology" by Mendelson

>> No.6745006

>>6745002
Adding to this, the first step is to stop listening to anyone who says things like
>This text is a classic, everyone should read it!
>It's not old and outdated, it's the standard reference!
Basically stop taking recommendations from the fucking Chicago Undergraduate Math Bibliography.

>> No.6745027

>>6741674
Most of oldbooks are god tier at the pedagogy level. They cared more about the student imo.

>> No.6745031

>>6745002
I am in dire need of Discrete math books for the semester ahead, any ideas?

I'll take anything, from introductory to advanced. The few I've flipped through were dry as a bone and "scholastic".

>> No.6745046

You really do need specific language to properly translate ideas. There cannot be ambiguity in some cases.

>> No.6745062

>>6741468
>le kewl latin word meme
Not buying it, and it doesn't make you look smart.

>> No.6745074

Normally I try to stay away from these questions but since the thread is already discussing it I will go ahead and ask. I am a recovering alcoholic and have taken up an interest in math. This has helped distract me from drinking a good bit. It started out as just doing lessons on khan academy just as something to keep me occupied. I have gotten back up to trig, which is where I was at the end of high school 6 years ago. I'm just about to take the next step into calc. Should I keep following the khan academy lesson plan or seek out different material? If I choose to go back to school for math will khan academy prepare for it or will I come up short? My mind isn't what it use to be simply from years of alcohol abuse but I managed to get from algebra 1 to trig in about 6 months from 2-3 hours a day of practice.

>> No.6745082

>>6742401
This I have several textbooks for each subject one for learning and the other for references

>>6745074
I personally like Spivaks book for Calc . Khan is good and MitOpenCourseWare is good through ODEs (ordinary diff equations). Use both and see what you are the most comfortable with but remember lectures are only supplements to practice that is where math is really learned

I personally need to buy the print and work it out manually. The computer is incredibly distracting. The weird thing is that I have no problem coding on the computer but when it comes to solving problems I need a pencil and paper and a secluded area. I work in Stats so I do both pretty equally.

>> No.6745104

>>6745082
>Update
My main problem with studying is finding practice problems. I normally loosely pay attention to the lectures as I'm doing something else and then just do tons of practice problems. However, when I come to a subject I have trouble with I will do all the problems I have so many times that I will memorize all answers and steps without really understanding the content. I will go back, watch lectures, then try problems again. I just haven't been able to find practice problems between the books I have and khan academy.

>> No.6745105

>>6745104
Try using other textbooks on the same subject and steal some of their exercises. Calc has hundreds of textbooks.

>> No.6745114

>>6745105
I guess there is no getting out of having to buy books. I guess I'll have to buy another trig book and go over my last few chapters before I move on. I'm just afraid that my alcohol abuse has limited my ability to understand these concepts and that I may not be able to go any further. I suppose it is time to talk to my doctor about that though.

>> No.6745117

>>6745114
Don't give up hope bud! Math is hard for everyone (I failed Calc)! Also props for staying clean!

try this http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm

>> No.6745122

>>6745114
Also while I know its blasphemy to link reddit here this is useful

http://www.reddit.com/r/YouShouldKnow/comments/1n4fg2/ysk_that_the_internet_archive_has_almost_2500/

>> No.6745180

>linear algebra lecture notes for the semester
>It's 60 pages long including problem sets.
>look into book the corresponding material
>320 pages equivalent

How do you not include a single drawing/illustration/figure on a linear algebra 101 class covering Gaussian elimination, matrix algebra, determinants, vector spaces, transforms and diagonalization?

Are they competing for the smallest most unreadable pdf award?

>> No.6745500

what are some strategies I should use when studying math outside of class? I'd like to get ahead by a few lessons if I could in calc

>> No.6747076

flashcards

practice problems

60,000 repetitions

have a friend pretend ambush you with a flash quiz

the anxiety will prepare you to handle stress and pressure

i could go on but the rest would be classified

>> No.6748792
File: 14 KB, 464x464, 1407195554692.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6748792

>>6745062
>He didn't go to a private school and take latin as a subject

lel, pleb

>> No.6748795

>>6745122
link to fucking archive itself, not fucking lebbit you asshole. lebbit is cancer of the internet. and that link just points to here:

http://archive.org/details/opensource_textbooks

>> No.6748803

>>6748795
territorial nerd detected

>> No.6748806

>>6745062
Logical fallacies are always referred to by their latin name

stop using argumentum ad being a dumbfuck

>> No.6748807

>>6741405
Newton taught himself calculus at the same rate you learn it in college

>> No.6748828

>>6742401
I switched from math to physics because I couldn't handle proofs, was god-tier in calc 3 and d.eq. though.

Basic analysis proofs using infimum and supremum killed me and I only got proof by induction and proof by limits by taking a topics in symbolic logic philosophy class and actually dropping the class.

Fucking time management kills me as well. Someone please ban me, I need to study.