The optimal path to mathematical mastery is "Error establishing a database connection"?
Computer science is math. Software engineering is not math.
Sheafification – The optimal path to mathematical mastery: The fast track (2022)
21–30 of 53 posts
Re: Sheafification – The optimal path to mathematical mastery: The fast track (2022)
#22This is wrong. In Computer Science language, human learning works in greedy way. We make locally optimal decisions in life. We cannot learn something in globally optimal way. We learn something in locally optimal way. And by repeating that we can reach somewhere at some point.
Re: Sheafification – The optimal path to mathematical mastery: The fast track (2022)
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shivlov for the one and only text in linear algebra is rough. IMO, it’s a little terse and fast paced. Efficient if you’re already well versed enough to be dangerous, but otherwise I think might slow down the beginner to a crawl in places. Same for Hartshorne’s Algebraic Geometry. Neither of these are bad textbooks at all, they both have a place on my bookshelf, but certainly better options have appeared through the…
What would you recommend as a supplement to Shilov's LA book?
Re: Sheafification – The optimal path to mathematical mastery: The fast track (2022)
#24This is wrong. In Computer Science language, human learning works in greedy way. We make locally optimal decisions in life. We cannot learn something in globally optimal way. We learn something in locally optimal way. And by repeating that we can reach somewhere at some point.
Here's my take on this - you should try to organize your local space of affordances and rewards in such a way that locally optimal choices will over time get you closer towards your global objective.
Re: Sheafification – The optimal path to mathematical mastery: The fast track (2022)
#25The optimal path to mathematical mastery is "Error establishing a database connection"?
Re: Sheafification – The optimal path to mathematical mastery: The fast track (2022)
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
He probably doesn’t know how. This message is em from Wordpress. There are many WP providers where you just signup and start writing. They don’t tell you that if you get to HN front page, your db will die. I don’t know any static blog providers. He’d have to roll out his own or use Medium/Substack.
> I don’t know any static blog providers. Bear Blog comes to mind (no connection): https://bearblog.dev
Re: Sheafification – The optimal path to mathematical mastery: The fast track (2022)
#27I am not sure if I agree with the list. I mean, one red flag is the frequent mention of Landau & Lifshitz. It is considered a "standard textbook", but I feel it stuck there by inertia. There are quite a few choices of both less boring and more insightful. (Back when I was reading such stuff, 20 years ago, the Feynman Lectures provided orders magnitude more insight. And fun.)
I have to admit I like the FLP less than the typical reader—it’s immensely fun in the moment, but I’ve always found the material too disjointed to build a coherent picture (ah, and now we have the tools to understand this random fun thing that I’ve never mentioned before and never going to mention after). As far as classic introductory books, the Berkeley course covers less, but the things it does cover fit together much better.
As for L&L, it’s just very uneven in quality. General relativity is great; electromagnetism is kind of bad. (And the two are in the same book!) Theoretical mechanics is adequate but way too much of a slog despite how short it is. Elasticity is surprisingly good. QM is OK but there’s a dozen approaches to QM depending on your background and it’s a toss-up whether this one will work for you. QED is good at the things it covers but like half of those things are relegated to the status of obscure specialist topics these days, while the point of view is something you should be aware of eventually but definitely not at your first go through the subject. And so on.
Re: Sheafification – The optimal path to mathematical mastery: The fast track (2022)
#28Re: Sheafification – The optimal path to mathematical mastery: The fast track (2022)
#29Even more so is the idea that you can actually cover the material listed in that page in 3 years. If you were to blast through it in that time you would only be skimming the very surface of the topics. There's simply no way you could possibly do all of those subjects justice in that time.
[1] As Euclid is supposed to have said about geometry to the Pharoah Ptolemy when Ptolemy said he wanted to learn geometry but because of all the concerns of his kingdom he didn't have time to read the Elements.
[2] "Linear Algebra done Right" by Sheldon Axler
"Understanding Analysis" by Stephen Abbott
"Topics in Algebra" by Herstein. this is a lovely book and beautifully written but some of the notation is a bit dated. I have two more recent algebra books but they are a bit advanced for me until I work through Herstein. They are Aluffi "Algebra Chapter 0" which is a good modern algebra book which introduces category theory at the start and Hien I forget the title but it's a springer one that he claims is good for an introduction but it's definitely not. It assumes you know a lot. It's very good though.