41–50 of 77 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's cute that the article is littered with Amazon referral links to textbooks.
I'm curious why people care about articles with referral links. It's not like you're paying more if you end up buying something, is it?
The main thing to remember is that nobody learns mathematics to any significant depth by reading. The only way to learn it is by doing it. Doing it carefully, and in full detail, not falling into the trap of "and I understand it from there". So the biggest barriers to doing it on your own aren't source material (there is lots of that) it's a good source of correction. There is also the usual problem of self study, in…
Or you can post them on math stackexchange and get feedback for free from bored? mathematicians :)
The main thing to remember is that nobody learns mathematics to any significant depth by reading. The only way to learn it is by doing it. Doing it carefully, and in full detail, not falling into the trap of "and I understand it from there". So the biggest barriers to doing it on your own aren't source material (there is lots of that) it's a good source of correction. There is also the usual problem of self study, in…
>There is also the usual problem of self study, in that you don't have a roadmap and can waste time easily. Can you expand on what you mean by "roadmap"? To me, a roadmap is very easy to get and can be arrived at from different angles. method 1) Pick up an "Advanced Mathematics" book and start at page 1. The sequential chapters of that book would start a roadmap. If page 1 looks incomprehensible, look at the preface/…
You can try and do something like recapitulate the core curriculum of a math degree, say, but there are constraints there you aren't aware of and it won't be the right path for everyone.
method 2 expanded to "actually ask questions at some of these locations" is actually a good way to inject some outside direction. So it's a mitigation for this problem.
Amazing how thorough the Math curriculum is in the UK! I got a minor at my undergrad just by doing stats, linear algebra and calc through multivariate. I think I was just 2-3 courses shy of a BA in the subject. I'm curious how many people have met self-trained mathematicians in real life. I know there are storied examples, but is it feasible? (Compared to say - self-trained programmers or writers)
I wouldn't call this a good thing; this just seems like a sane basis for any maths work (including Comp Sci).
Amazing how thorough the Math curriculum is in the UK! I got a minor at my undergrad just by doing stats, linear algebra and calc through multivariate. I think I was just 2-3 courses shy of a BA in the subject. I'm curious how many people have met self-trained mathematicians in real life. I know there are storied examples, but is it feasible? (Compared to say - self-trained programmers or writers)
> I got a minor at my undergrad just by doing stats, linear algebra and calc through multivariate. I wouldn't call this a good thing; this just seems like a sane basis for any maths work (including Comp Sci).
I know that many learn programming themselves but I'm curious if anyone have learn advanced mathematics this way.
The main thing to remember is that nobody learns mathematics to any significant depth by reading. The only way to learn it is by doing it. Doing it carefully, and in full detail, not falling into the trap of "and I understand it from there". So the biggest barriers to doing it on your own aren't source material (there is lots of that) it's a good source of correction. There is also the usual problem of self study, in…
The main thing to remember is that nobody learns mathematics to any significant depth by reading. The only way to learn it is by doing it. Doing it carefully, and in full detail, not falling into the trap of "and I understand it from there". So the biggest barriers to doing it on your own aren't source material (there is lots of that) it's a good source of correction. There is also the usual problem of self study, in…
This is probably the reason why there are so many more autodidact programmers than mathematicians. When programming, you know if you made an error as soon as you try to run your code. The program, by definition, must be "correct" in order to execute. The "source of correction" is the error detection built into any programming language runtime or compiler. No such "source of correction" exists for mathematics, and tha…
The main thing to remember is that nobody learns mathematics to any significant depth by reading. The only way to learn it is by doing it. Doing it carefully, and in full detail, not falling into the trap of "and I understand it from there". So the biggest barriers to doing it on your own aren't source material (there is lots of that) it's a good source of correction. There is also the usual problem of self study, in…
The same could be said of programming, or anything really.
The CS parts (which you can view as a branch of mathematics) of programming certainly have this feature.