Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Masterclass on mathematical thinking

terrytao.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 137 posts

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#91

Post by imranq »

This is nice initiative and any attempt to make mathematics more accessible is a value added to society in my book. However, saying you will learn "mathematical thinking" by watching 1.5 hours of passively watching, even Professor Tao, is quite an overpromise. I don't think there's a subject that requires more hands on practice and thinking than math, especially higher level math, so this is more along the lines of edutainment. So in my mind, how valuable this course is depends on what this content replaces for you. If watching this series replaces something distracting then its great, but if it replaces actually doing problems and working out proofs, then it's not worth it.

Finally there's a celebrity aspect to Masterclass that's a bit strange. Like these guys are famous, and because they're famous, they are the most worthy to teach you something.

Some series you should check out that are free and IMO provide much better value for time:

Academy of Achievement: https://achievement.org/ * Some good lessons with Eric Lander, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Demis Hassabis

3B1B: https://www.3blue1brown.com/

Numberphile: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoxcjq-8xIDTYp3uz647V5A

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#92

Post by mohanmca »

maroonblazer wrote: post #63
ConnorCallahan wrote: post #57

I just watched the first 8 out of 12 episodes and I was disappointed. There were certainly a couple good nuggets but I'm afraid that Masterclass puts too much emphasis on making things simple such that he spends most of the time talking about really simple ideas.

Have you seen the EdX course Effective Thinking Through Mathematics (free) [0]? I really enjoyed it and found the principles really do transfer beyond the domain of math, as the title suggests. The production values are nowhere near what you get with Masterclass (thus, why it's free) but the content can't be beat. [0] https://learning.edx.org/course/course-v1:UTAustinX+UT.9.10x...

Thanks! I like the book "5 Effective Thinking Book", will give a try!

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#93

Post by [deleted] »

nefitty wrote: post #51
NikolaeVarius wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genes must have something to do with it. Take the case of Srinivasa Ramanujan No formal training in math. Made insane contributions to mathematics including solving "unsolvable" problems. > A child prodigy by age 11, he had exhausted the mathematical knowledge of two college students who were lodgers at his home. He was later lent a book written by S. L. Loney on advanced trigonometry.[18][19] He mastered this by the…

I'm not sure why people feel so allergic to the idea of a genetic intelligence boost. Our genes encode the layout of physical race tracks on which marbles of matter and information travel. Some people's bodies have a bunch of muscle tracks, so as they grow, their body benefits from the activity on those. They grow up to find it easier to gain muscle than other people. For geniuses, I imagine that the brain is a perfe…

[deleted]

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#94

Post by ramblerman »

imranq wrote: post #91

This is nice initiative and any attempt to make mathematics more accessible is a value added to society in my book. However, saying you will learn "mathematical thinking" by watching 1.5 hours of passively watching, even Professor Tao, is quite an overpromise. I don't think there's a subject that requires more hands on practice and thinking than math, especially higher level math, so this is more along the lines of e…

I fully agree on the celebrity worship, but am a bit confused with how you then align

> Finally there's a celebrity aspect to Masterclass that's a bit strange. Like these guys are famous, and because they're famous, they are the most worthy to teach you something.

with the recommendation

> Academy of Achievement: https://achievement.org/ * Some good lessons with Eric Lander, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Demis Hassabis

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#95

Post by wolverine876 »

pdog wrote: post #79
uoaei wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really common opinion that TT is smart because of his genes? I would think having a helpful and engaged math-fluent father and lots of encouragement from an early age has way more to do with it. You can't seriously believe that an introduction into mathematical thinking from an early age and close advision from math-fluent parents is only 10% of the reason that TT is where he is today.

His dad is a doctor and his mom is an astrophysicist and mathematician. Do you think that is a coincidence?

But how do they pass on their skills, through years of daily interaction, or via genetics?

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#96

Post by wolverine876 »

paulpauper wrote: post #9
klyrs wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's 90% genes , 10% other factors. Do you have evidence to support these numbers, or the more general claim of genetic supremacy?

He was a demonstrating adult level math ability even at the age of 5. Also, he was genius level at other subjects too. How would it not be genetic. Think of how hard parents push their kids in today's super-competitive economy and high-stakes higher ed system, how many turn out even close to as talented as him?

> Think of how hard parents push their kids in today's super-competitive economy and high-stakes higher ed system, how many turn out even close to as talented as him?

Maybe they don't know how to do it. Maybe TT got lucky.

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#97

Post by whatshisface »

nefitty wrote: post #49
paulpauper wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding his brothers, imagine if IQ is like a bunch of switches. TT was born with all his switches flipped 'on' out of some maximum. His brothers were born with most of them flipped on, as were his parents. Having high IQ parents increases the odds of more switches being flipped on, but having all of them flipped is still innate.

I've struggled to visually conceptualize this sort of occurrence. This helps a lot. Thank you! Now, to torture the metaphor, how do I flip on the rest of my switches...

People on Reddit are taking pills to try and do that. Sometimes you hear about them getting aggressive cancers. Other times you hear about them semi-successfully treating damage they did to their brains with past drug use. Randomized controlled trials never show anything, but if you're being held back from being a genius by one protein that you got a bad gene for, you'd be one of the positive testimonials without showing up above the noise in a trial. Who knows.

Ask again in 2122.

In the meantime, I guess, we all need to learn that our worth as a person is determined by who we are, not what we are.

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#98

Post by whatshisface »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #83
nefitty wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why people feel so allergic to the idea of a genetic intelligence boost. Our genes encode the layout of physical race tracks on which marbles of matter and information travel. Some people's bodies have a bunch of muscle tracks, so as they grow, their body benefits from the activity on those. They grow up to find it easier to gain muscle than other people. For geniuses, I imagine that the brain is a perfe…

The big reason is because there have been a number of studies that show that the ability of genetics to explain IQ is not especially major.

The studies trying to find the link between genetics and IQ are flawed in that they don't have a way to handle the interactions between genes. Instead they are based on correlations.

If you will be good at baseball if you have A and B, OK with neither, but terrible with only one, those genes will be identified in most studies as having nothing to do with baseball, maybe even identified as harmful.

I can offer a concrete example. Autism is more often found in high-IQ families, but itself is associated with decreased IQ. That suggests one case where either A and B alone are harmful, having neither makes you fine (and unlikely to bear children with A or B), and having both makes you smart.

I am not sure if we want people to figure out how to make connections involving specific genes, because a lot of us benefit from living in a world where we can game LeetCode by working longer and harder in a way that's unrelated to what Google is looking for.

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#99

Post by IggleSniggle »

nefitty wrote: post #74
raphlinus wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I come across as an alien. For example, I'm very deeply involved in my local Quaker meeting, and I don't think any of that is particularly different than others. That said, I can nerd out extremely deeply into a problem, to a point where I've noticed other people's eyes glaze over. Case in point, I've become interested in memory models for GPUs, and while most people in the field would be content to lea…

Very cool. Thanks for the response. I may be reaching but maybe genius is a combination of curiosity, processing speed, mental RAM and focus. Maybe each of those can be improved in regular people...

As a human high in curiosity and processing speed but low in RAM and focus, my personal experience is that diet+prescription drugs can unlock the rest.

At least for me, this also comes with costs. Some of these costs are immediately observable to me (much lower levels of broad-insight / Gordian-Knot-slicing, and I am less patient with others). Other costs are only presumed…I have guesses about associated long-term health risks both direct and indirect.

Anyway, all this to say, I think it can be done artificially. Since these things take time to play out towards mastery, you better hope you can get it right. Just like in software, some things can be a Pareto improvement, but some things can be prematurely optimized, and some things really never needed to be built in the first place.

Re: Masterclass on mathematical thinking

#100

Post by whatshisface »

geodel wrote: post #69
nefitty wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why people feel so allergic to the idea of a genetic intelligence boost. Our genes encode the layout of physical race tracks on which marbles of matter and information travel. Some people's bodies have a bunch of muscle tracks, so as they grow, their body benefits from the activity on those. They grow up to find it easier to gain muscle than other people. For geniuses, I imagine that the brain is a perfe…

> I'm not sure why people feel so allergic to the idea of a genetic intelligence boost. Because it kinda puncture this feel good marketing bull that "you can be anything you want". It could also shut endless flowing money into extra-coaching classes outside normal schools which promise to "help child to reach their fullest potential".

But you can be anything you want, what's set by nature is how hard you have to work for each milestone of it.
Post reply on HN