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

Learning algebra in my 60s

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–158 of 158 posts

Re: Learning algebra in my 60s

#151

Post by mikewarot »

So that's how a packer thinks! I'm a mapper[1], and it's always been a mystery to me as to how packers got that way.

When I was an IT Admin, I worked with woman who VERY competent at her job, but always needed help using the computer, for even basic tasks, even with a list instructions. It took time before it dawned on me she was a packer, and my instructions weren't specific enough.

I started making exact instructions for her, accounting for any possible variance in each step. (As you would in a program) Once I did that, she was thrilled, and we got along very well after that.

An example of things that can throw off a packer... in Windows Explorer, drag a file from one window to another... depending on context, there are 3 possible outcomes (move, copy, shortcut creation)... that confuses the heck out of people, especially packers.

  https://wiki.c2.com/?MappersVsPackers

Re: Learning algebra in my 60s

#152

Post by ivansavz »

sirsinsalot wrote: post #22
mattwilsonn888 wrote: post #8

It's a shame he went to all the trouble of avoiding conventional education (for the wrong reasons), but then still ended up going down an execution rather than concept focused route. As soon as you start memorizing operations and treating math more like a narrow grind only approached through arbitrary problems solved primarily through computation or use of rote application of poorly understood technique, you lose the…

I left school at 15, never to return to education, in part because of how maths was taught. There was never an explanation of the _why_ of things. It was very frustrating, and the teaching was very poor. I ended up a programmer, in part, because I figured if teachers weren't teaching, i'd teach myself. This has been a good strategy for me, however there's serious holes in my pure maths knowledge.

Hi sirsinalot, I wrote a book that might be of interest to you: https://nobsmath.com/ = math for adult learners

Here is a PDF preview to get an idea of the contents: https://minireference.com/static/excerpts/noBSmath_v5_previe... and a standalone printable concept map: https://minireference.com/static/conceptmaps/math_concepts.p... There is A LOT to learn, but I assure you that as an adult you can understand the material much more easily, especially with our background in computing now.

I highly recommend you try rekindling your relation with math one day. It has lots of knowledge buzz moments, when you see things fit together. Feel free to email me if you have any questions, or you can post them on this forum for readers of the book https://gitter.im/noBSmath/community

Re: Learning algebra in my 60s

#153

Post by ivansavz »

victor106 wrote: post #32

My friends dad in his late 60's wanted to learn math and used the No Bullshit math and physics from https://minireference.com/ and loved it. Their Linear Algebra is quite good too.

For anyone interested, here are preview PDFs of the two books: https://minireference.com/static/excerpts/noBSmathphys_v5_pr... https://minireference.com/static/excerpts/noBSLA_v2_preview....

and standalone concept maps that show the prerequisite graph (very useful when learning from any book): https://minireference.com/static/conceptmaps/math_and_physic... and https://minireference.com/static/conceptmaps/linear_algebra_...

I recently released a new book with just high school materials, specifically targeted at adult learners. Check out the website here: https://nobsmath.com/

Re: Learning algebra in my 60s

#154

Post by trebbble »

wawjgreen wrote: post #149
trebbble wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EDIT: I see I have touched quite a few nerves. It reads like a post you made for yourself, not for the benefit of any reader.

Writing is always primarily of benefit to myself--and hence of any benefit to anyone else....would you cook a meal you wouldn't eat yourself but wish others did? Writing that is geared towards explicitly benefiting others (at the cost of not benefiting our own selves) is shallow, useless and fake.

My point is that your posts read like you have a chip on your shoulder and are working that out in your writing, and that comes through so strongly that it overwhelms any other message you may be trying to communicate. The original post, for instance, isn't off-putting because it's contrarian, but because it reads like the contrarianism is mainly in service of presenting yourself as cleverer than three well-regarded historical figures, plus the author of the article—which, even if that's true, who cares? That's what I meant by the post seeming like it was more for you than for anyone else.

You seemed surprised enough at the reaction to your original post that I thought you might like to know what about it probably "touched quite a few nerves", is all.

Re: Learning algebra in my 60s

#155

Post by Viliam1234 »

auggierose wrote: post #138
Viliam1234 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you know the history of education, the "new math" thing is a sad story of a mind-blowing stupidity that keeps hurting math students for decades, because it divided most people into two camps that keep promoting two different wrong ideas. Theories of education are often based on some psychological theory -- you have a theory how people think in general, and you use it to design a process to teach people. If we skip…

I don't really know much about the history of education, I only read the article I linked. From what I understand from that, it is not so much that constructivism has been debunked, but rather that in order to explain something properly, you need to understand it yourself deeply. Now, many teachers don't actually understand math on that level. So it will be difficult for them to teach it based on constructivism. That…

> in order to explain something properly, you need to understand it yourself deeply. Now, many teachers don't actually understand math on that level. So it will be difficult for them to teach it based on constructivism.

Yes, this is a sad truth about teachers, many of them actually do not understand deeply the stuff they teach.

It seemed to me unlikely that e.g. a 10 years old kid could ask teacher a math question (related to what they are learning) that the math teacher couldn't answer. Like, any adult, especially one with a university education, should be able to answer any question from the first four grades of elementary school, right? Except... nope. I have friends that try to promote constructivist education at schools, and "what if the kids ask me something I will not be able to answer" is indeed a frequent objection made by actual teachers.

Like, okay, it is definitely possible to make an innocently sounding math question that is actually extremely hard to solve. My favorite example is: "can you cut a square into an odd number of triangles of equal area, but not necessarily the same shape?" (The answer is no, but the proof requires university-level math.) But in real life, this is extremely unlikely to happen; and if it happened to me, I would simply say "sorry, I do not know".

> everybody understands things differently

This is perfectly okay. You let the kids think about it individually first, then discuss their solutions with each other. If you get multiple explanations how things work, that's great -- having things described from multiple perspectives helps you understand it even better.

Re: Learning algebra in my 60s

#156

Post by victor106 »

ivansavz wrote: post #153
victor106 wrote: post #32

My friends dad in his late 60's wanted to learn math and used the No Bullshit math and physics from https://minireference.com/ and loved it. Their Linear Algebra is quite good too.

For anyone interested, here are preview PDFs of the two books: https://minireference.com/static/excerpts/noBSmathphys_v5_pr... https://minireference.com/static/excerpts/noBSLA_v2_preview.... and standalone concept maps that show the prerequisite graph (very useful when learning from any book): https://minireference.com/static/conceptmaps/math_and_physic... and https://minireference.com/static/conceptmaps/linear_algeb…

Thank you.

We can't wait for your stats book to be released.

Re: Learning algebra in my 60s

#157

Post by wawjgreen »

trebbble wrote: post #154
wawjgreen wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Writing is always primarily of benefit to myself--and hence of any benefit to anyone else....would you cook a meal you wouldn't eat yourself but wish others did? Writing that is geared towards explicitly benefiting others (at the cost of not benefiting our own selves) is shallow, useless and fake.

My point is that your posts read like you have a chip on your shoulder and are working that out in your writing, and that comes through so strongly that it overwhelms any other message you may be trying to communicate. The original post, for instance, isn't off-putting because it's contrarian, but because it reads like the contrarianism is mainly in service of presenting yourself as cleverer than three well-regarded…

It certainly only appears like I am "self-promoting" but I was not aware of that until you pointed it out....Which, even so, I don't care whether someone cares or not about it.

There are a number of "well-regarded" figures in history--Columbus is one, the Americans even celebrate a day in his name--who should be condemned in fact...

My comment is of service to the intelligent reader and its main purport is: it's ok to find fault with the seemingly intelligent "well-regarded historical figures" if they do not match your objectively-finetuned assessment of what it means to be intelligent.

Re: Learning algebra in my 60s

#158

Post by water8 »

inetsee wrote: post #10
water8 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about adderall? /s

Adderall doesn't make you smarter; it just makes you more alert. It helps you focus longer on whatever intellectual task you're working on, be it problem solving or studying. (Not /s)

So being able to work longer and focus harder than what would normally be physically possible is not the definition of “smarter” even if it’s temporary?
Post reply on HN