101–110 of 170 posts
While we're on the topic of this kind of thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synopsis_of_Pure_Mathematics
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A B is like 80% or so, judging from A being the best iirc? I'm not familiar with alphanumeric grading systems.
Things can get a bit customized at either end of the spectrum, but generally each letter covers 15%, with A..D covering the span 100% to 40%. So a B would be 70 to 85.
I got a B in probability because I didn't write a proof of the central limit theorem on the allowed cheat sheet for the final exam. So of course it's the first thing I looked for on this one. It's not there.
A B is like 80% or so, judging from A being the best iirc? I'm not familiar with alphanumeric grading systems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Things can get a bit customized at either end of the spectrum, but generally each letter covers 15%, with A..D covering the span 100% to 40%. So a B would be 70 to 85.
Shouldn't that sort of grading be on a bell curve? That would seem to be the fairest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder how long that can last before abuse kills the system. Some quotes from their page about KBFS [0]: "The 250GB free accounts will stay free" "we'll never run an ad-supported business" "we're not trying to make money" [0] https://keybase.io/docs/kbfs
How is Keybase funded anyway? They say they’re hiring, so money is coming from somewhere.
Wow, I have to say I feel somewhat bad for the author who spent so much time (months?) compiling this semi-comprehensive reference work. There's so much information, but at the same time, so little useful information to any particular reader. It's so broad as to be a hindrance to using it in any sort of daily reference. Who would use this? Wouldn't you probably resort to a reference more specific to your field? Is th…
I think the author's page (Alex Spartalis) deserves to be mentioned: https://www.alexspartalis.com/cheat-sheet.html He has the same version (v2.10) there and mentions that, "The Web version does not include the distribution functions due to file size restrictions. Email me if you would like a copy of these." That explains why pages 213-330 are missing. Someone should offer to upload the full copy to keybase.pub (or s…
I sent a message using the contact form. Thanks for mentioning this.
When I was studying mathematical physics, my classmates and I made similar quick reference notes in latex. Based on a cursory look, it seems to be missing some important complex analysis and abstract algebra/lie theory results (although I haven't read what the author studied).
Searching for stuff I've used, this document is also quite light on combinatorics, complexity theory, and order theory (and of stuff I haven't used much, I don't see anything on category theory or topology). I don't think 330 pages is nearly enough to be truly all-in-one.
If you literally wrote down sequences of definition, theorem, proof, definition, theorem, proof, ... with no exposition or exercises whatsoever, I think you might be able to include most undergraduate math in about 1000 pages. That would include calculus, real analysis, complex analysis, linear algebra, abstract algebra, discrete math. Maybe elementary number theory, topology and probability theory as well. That would be...horrible to learn from, frankly. Imagine a ten volume set of Baby Rudins, with no exercises.
If you really doubled down on the cheat sheet angle and didn't include any proofs - just the theorems, identities and inequalities - I think you could get through all undergrad math in a few hundred pages. But you wouldn't have any of the peripheral content the author included, like physics/economics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I actually can't tell if that was an intentional "margin" joke, or if the author is just bluntly stating a fact about Wiles' proof... EDIT: Nope, probably intentional. The author doesn't say something similar for any other proof based on a quick CTRL+F :)
Fermat wrote that in the margin of his book Arithmetica that a proof existed, but there wasn’t space in the margin to write it. It took Wiles 385 years to find a proof, and it won’t fit in a margin. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat%27s_Last_Theorem That’s the allure of the theorem; that a simple unknown proof may exist.
I wasn't sure if the author was making an intentional callout to Fermat's lost marvelous proof he couldn't fit in the margin. But indeed, looks like he was, since he doesn't seem to have really mentioned the length of any other proofs.