I know this is going to be the case for likely nobody, but I have browsed most of the self-study math threads that pop up here as a forever-on-my-todo-list thing and I have a remark to make: I have yet to find a guide that does not start with the assumption that you graduated highschool. That is a very reasonable assumption to make. We are in a community of technology and engineering, it would be a bit ridiculous to…
Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
131–140 of 216 posts
Re: Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
> this is excellent execellt advice ... especially the part about skipping the exercises. if you're not trying to write a dissertation or pass a qual (and you're just interested in learning and being exposed) then you don't need to do them I think this is deeply mistaken. In a well-chosen book, such as the ones in the submitted article, doing the exercises is not to test your memorisation, it's to develop your unders…
>Ignore the exercises if you want, but you almost certainly will end up knowing about the math, but not able to do it. Isn't that literally exactly what I said? > if you're not trying to write a dissertation or pass a qual (and you're just interested in learning and being exposed) then you don't need to do them
> if you're not trying to write a dissertation or pass a qual (and you're just interested in learning and being exposed) then you don't need to do them
There's ground in the middle, and this thread is about that. This thread is not about learning for tests and qualifications, nor is it about "being exposed", it's learning how to do the math.
And for that you need to do the exercises. You don't need to do all of them, you don't need to be completionist about it, but if you don't do the exercises, if you don't actually do the math then you won't actually be able to do the math.
Specifically, you said (quoting again):
> if you're ... just interested in learning ...
There's a difference between learning about and learning to do. If you meant just "learning about" then you are at odds with the entire thread. True, in that case you don't need to do the exercises, but I don't think that's what people are talking about here. I think people are talking about being able to do the math.
And if you meant "learning to do" then in my opinion you are wrong, and one needs to do a large slab of the exercises.
Otherwise it's fairy floss, and not steak.
My apologies if all this seems overkill, but there's a real danger of talking past each other and being in violent agreement, and I wanted to state explicitly and clearly what I mean, and why I thought you said something different.
Re: Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
#133I know this is going to be the case for likely nobody, but I have browsed most of the self-study math threads that pop up here as a forever-on-my-todo-list thing and I have a remark to make: I have yet to find a guide that does not start with the assumption that you graduated highschool. That is a very reasonable assumption to make. We are in a community of technology and engineering, it would be a bit ridiculous to…
Re: Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
#134Re: Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
The books are called "Essential Mathematics" 1 and 2. They correspond to these modules. http://www.openuniversity.edu/courses/modules/mst124 http://www.openuniversity.edu/courses/modules/mst125 Second-hand OU books are usually bought from https://www.universitybooksearch.co.uk/
Could you provide the direct links for the books used in: MST123, MST124, MST125? I could not find them in your links.
Re: Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
I won't repeat the good suggestions already made, but I'll add this: find a set of the Open University MST124 text books. The OU publishes their own maths books, which are specially written for self-study (since that's your only option with the OU) and their courses generally assume very little or no previous knowledge. There's an even more basic course (MST123 I think) if that one is too advanced. These are serious…
I'm studying for a Math BSc with the OU and I think their books are great. They are designed for 100% self-study and are polished over the years. The range of topics in level 1 math courses such as MST124 or MST125 is huge, while keeping the appropriate level of difficulty.
Re: Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
#137I know this is going to be the case for likely nobody, but I have browsed most of the self-study math threads that pop up here as a forever-on-my-todo-list thing and I have a remark to make: I have yet to find a guide that does not start with the assumption that you graduated highschool. That is a very reasonable assumption to make. We are in a community of technology and engineering, it would be a bit ridiculous to…
I had the same problem. There is a series of books for folks like us -"Pre-Algebra Demystified", "Algebra Demystified" etc. I used them to catch up for a graduate level statistics course. One hour every morning for three months took me from pre-algebra through trig, and I did very well in class. I loved these simple books. They contain exactly zero owl-drawing.
Re: Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
#138I really enjoy how the subject is divorced from a lot of the modern attention demands and encourages more of a 'zen' thinking style.
As others have highlighted, it can be difficult. I work full-time as a software engineer and at the end of the day there's usually not much left in the tank in terms of "creative work". The morning is usually more productive for me - generally I'll spend 10-15 minutes on the commute in reading over the proof of some lemma or working through some computational exercise.
Things that have helped me:
- Focusing on a particular problem area rather than just "mathematics". The classical problems of Gauss and Euler tend to be more my speed than the modern mathematical problems of Hilbert or beyond. What started my journey was looking into the insolubility of the general quintic polynomial equation, something you learn in high school as a random factoid but has a lot of depth.
- Studying from small textbooks that I can fit in a backpack, so I can "make progress" during my commute. Dummit + Foote might be a great algebra reference but it's just too bulky to transport.
- Limiting the scope of how I think about the activity - my goal isn't to master these concepts on the level of a mathematics graduate student, it's more on the order of Sudoku. If I don't get something, that's okay. People spend their whole lifetimes learning this material and I'm just trying to fit this into whatever creative time I have left after the full-time job is done.
Re: Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
#139Does anybody have any experience with How to Prove It? by Velleman? Recently I was thinking of starting on it, but I'm not sure about the level of commitment necessary.
Re: Mathematics for the Adventurous Self-Learner
#140I know this is going to be the case for likely nobody, but I have browsed most of the self-study math threads that pop up here as a forever-on-my-todo-list thing and I have a remark to make: I have yet to find a guide that does not start with the assumption that you graduated highschool. That is a very reasonable assumption to make. We are in a community of technology and engineering, it would be a bit ridiculous to…