Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject • Hacker News Board

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#31

Post by pbhjpbhj » Sun, Dec 19, 2010, 11:07 PM UTC

sliverstorm wrote: post #21

shou4577 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I realize that using words like "vector" and "combinatorics" are poor choices. This is part of the problem. It is difficult to come up with a good metaphor that is simultaneously interesting and meaningful. I think the Rubik's cube is a great example. Thanks, I'll be using that in the future.

Telling them what it can do or what it is used for is almost always the best way to talk about something you do with the totally uninitiated. Make sure it's something they've heard of before, e.g. the Rubik's cube example.

>"Telling them what it can do or what it is used for is almost always the best way to talk about something you do with the totally uninitiated."

Although I'd guess for most researchers in Maths what it can be used for is many years away (if it actually has a "practical use") and what it can do is far too esoteric for the layman.

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#32

Post by jpren » Sun, Dec 19, 2010, 11:31 PM UTC

spacemanaki wrote: post #7

alexwestholm wrote: post #2

The author has rightfully directed his words at those considering becoming math majors. Consequently, he makes it clear that most basic math education is inadequate to really understand math and its practicality, but leaves as the only solution enrolling as a math student. This is a great call to action for students, but for the broader audience, it leaves me thinking the following: My math background is clearly inad…

One series of articles which might serve as a start is Steven Strogatz's series which ran in the NY Times earlier this year: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/series/steven_strogatz... It's written for a layperson (he starts with counting on Sesame Street) but nonetheless touches on some very advanced topics, and describes them in simple ways. It won't give you a firm foundation in mathematics (the articles are p…

Very apt that you brought up Steven Strogatz. I took Prof. Strogatz's calculus for engineers class back in college (Spring 2004). If you like the way he discusses math curiousities in his NYTimes column, you'll surely enjoy his lectures as well!

In my life at least, it's been rare to come across a math professor/educator who pushes harder for understanding (connecting the dots) rather than knowledge (disjointed lists of equations and theorems). Mathematicians' laments aside, inspired teachers are already changing the way that some students -- albeit a small minority -- view the field of mathematics.

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#33

Post by endtime » Sun, Dec 19, 2010, 11:56 PM UTC

hypersoar wrote: post #10

I'm pursuing a career as a math professor (currently an undergrad). I'm not shy about my passion for math, and this has lead to countless conversations like the ones below: "What do you want to do with your math degree?" "I want to go to graduate school and eventually become a math professor." "Oh, so you want to teach!" "No, I want to do research." (Here they give some expression of confusion. I've had this particul…

I get the same thing as a CS person. Every time someone refers to me as an "IT major" or expects me to be able to fix their printer drivers I die a little inside.

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#34

Post by endtime » Sun, Dec 19, 2010, 11:58 PM UTC

Natsu wrote: post #14

The article's phrase "liberal education" is unlikely to be properly understood in a lot of the USA. The political meaning has so eclipsed the ordinary meaning that the latter seems all but unknown.

Well, the phrase "liberal arts education" is more common in the US, I think, but I also expect most people would get the meaning.

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#35

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 12:09 AM UTC

xyzzyz wrote: post #19

RiderOfGiraffes wrote: post #17

When I'm asked about math there are a couple of things. Firstly, I ask them about Pythagoras. Most people know of it, and I phrase it in terms of cardboard cutout squares. Take three squares cut from a heavy material, and make them so that A and B together weigh the same as C. Arrange them so their sides lie on a triangle. Not only is it always possible, but the triangle you get always has a right-angle. Why? How do…

Oh, Collatz problem. I usually use Goldbach or twin prime conjectures to explain the difficulty of seemingly simple problems, but come to think of it, Collatz is even better, because it does not involve any complicated concept at all -- Goldbach and twin prime conjectures are about primes, and sometimes people do not even know what primes are.

[deleted]

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#36

Post by Tycho » Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 12:44 AM UTC

I remember at school there was a bunch of kidsd who were good at maths seemingly due go natural aptitude, and some who were keen on the academic credibility it gave them... but genuinely I can only think if one person who actually displayed a 'passion' or at least a deep interest in the subject.

I was very enthusiastic about physics and lots of people were about English and we'd have creative writing groups and stuff, but maths was just... Some folk quietly excelled at it and that was that.

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#37

Post by dannyb » Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 1:21 AM UTC

My only beef with his interesting post is that he uses graphics of completely understandable stuff like diagonalizing a matrix or the map of the phase space map of the logistic equation and then talks about current developments in math. Anything new is almost completely incomprehensible to me - a couple of years ago, I got a book about fractional calculus. I read about 5 pages away and gave it to a mathematician friend of mine...

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#38

Post by guscost » Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 3:10 AM UTC

One pet peeve about math education: calling "imaginary" numbers that makes it seem like there is such a thing as a number that is "real" in a literal sense. All numbers are actually imaginary, they exist as isomorphisms to things in the real world that have numbers or can be counted.

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#39

Post by shasta » Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 4:06 AM UTC

RiderOfGiraffes wrote: post #17

When I'm asked about math there are a couple of things. Firstly, I ask them about Pythagoras. Most people know of it, and I phrase it in terms of cardboard cutout squares. Take three squares cut from a heavy material, and make them so that A and B together weigh the same as C. Arrange them so their sides lie on a triangle. Not only is it always possible, but the triangle you get always has a right-angle. Why? How do…

> Possibly it's useless, but there's a bunch of stuff people thought would be useless, and they've given us micro-processors, SatNav, cryptography, error-correcting codes, and a million other things.

You're missing part of the argument, which has to do with the nature of the kinds of structures that mathematicians find interesting. Otherwise you can use this reasoning to justify anything at all.

Re: Mathematics: The Most Misunderstood Subject

#40

Post by JosefK » Mon, Dec 20, 2010, 4:30 AM UTC

HilbertSpace wrote: post #28

Part I Yet again we are flagellated, excoriated, eviscerated, etc. about 'mathematics'. Still, some crucial points are missing. Been there; done that; learned the lessons; and below are some crucial ones. Yes, candidate understatement of the millennium is that people don't understand math! Yup, they don't! That is, except mathematicians, and they are a tiny fraction of the population. I review some of the main direct…

> In particular, the level of math in academic computer science research made some progress with Knuth and since then has, in a word, sucked.

Could you elaborate on this? As someone currently pursuing a PhD in theoretical computer science, I often simply tell (nontechnical/nonacademic) people that I study mathematics rather than computer science, so this offhand remark is somewhat at odds with my personal experience.