81–90 of 91 posts
Where can I get their books? I badly want to read it.
1. http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=8F89864FED1AA4845F6... 2. http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=FD4A085FE66F570A611... 3. http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=3D0FD4F846B974F5188... 4. http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=2E63639FC0764A52560... 5. http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=881279B349E43D6BED4... And so on...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately Bourbakism polluted teaching of Mathematics in Europe c.a. 1960s. With visible effects. Except for Eastern Europe were it was opposed by Arnold. > These discoveries of connections between heterogeneous mathematical objects can be compared with the discovery of the connection between electricity and magnetism in physics or with the discovery of the similarity between the east coast of America and the wes…
That's interesting. I'd seen Arnold's work on teaching mathematics, and I'm very much aware of the dry formalism in Bourbaki books. However, I was not aware of the Arnold-Serre debate. But the thing that really caught my eye here is your claim that there were visible effects of Bourbakism polluting mathematics. Do you have any examples or specifics of that "visible effect". My question is a genuine one, not a challen…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> French has always seemed to me to be the language of mathematics, reason, logic For some reason I often find papers and thesis I read in French way more interesting, well thought and presented than most things I read in English. I have a few hypotheses on why I get this impression: 1) the publish or perish culture originated from the Anglo-Saxon world. Until recently the research written in the national language wa…
And yet the most impactful scientists, Newton and Darwin, spoke English, and the main way France industrialized was to copy developments in England.
This made me think; is there a collection of books or a volume that treats mathematic extensively from base to advanced? Right now everything is divided in specialized books with little to no connection from one to the other. Is there a feynman equivalent for maths?
Assuming you are asking in general and not specifically Bourbaki authored; * Mathematics: Its Content, Methods and Meaning by Aleksandrov, Kolmogorov, Lavrentev * The Princeton Companion to Mathematics by Timothy Gowers et al. * The Princeton Companion to Applied Mathematics by Higham et al.
For bourbaki, I had trouble figuring out what to read first, there are so many separate books. I'll try to figure it out
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm Czech and this revolutionary method of teaching came here in the 90's, when I entered my grammar school. Probably, it had a political “east vs. west” motivation among others, shortly after the velvet revolution... The first thing I learned in the 1st year of schools were basic concepts of set theory. We were drawing circles, ellipses and Venn diagrams (even though we didn't call them like that) filled with images…
I think teaching sets like this totally misses the point. Finite sets are trivial (and pretty useless), so there is no use for schoolkids, it is just a waste of time.
Perhaps it made sense in ye olde days when many students would not go on to junior high.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Assuming you are asking in general and not specifically Bourbaki authored; * Mathematics: Its Content, Methods and Meaning by Aleksandrov, Kolmogorov, Lavrentev * The Princeton Companion to Mathematics by Timothy Gowers et al. * The Princeton Companion to Applied Mathematics by Higham et al.
I'll take a look, thanks. For bourbaki, I had trouble figuring out what to read first, there are so many separate books. I'll try to figure it out
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think teaching sets like this totally misses the point. Finite sets are trivial (and pretty useless), so there is no use for schoolkids, it is just a waste of time.
On the other hand, arithmetic for very young kids like second-graders is probably also a waste of time. If you waited till they're older (or they express a genuine interest) I expect they'd learn it quickly enough and with less chance of learning mainly to hate math. Perhaps it made sense in ye olde days when many students would not go on to junior high.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For some reason I often find papers and thesis I read in French way more interesting, well thought and presented than most things I read in English. The much simpler explanation is that there are way more English as a foreign language PhD students than there are French as a foreign language PhD students.
I’m note sure why you bring foreign-speakers doing their PhD in French (the one who does have outstanding language abilities btw), I’m speaking about research output in general. The few thesis I looked from my immediate research entourage are quite weak compared to the few I’ve read from my home country. There is definitely something different in the writing and the expectations between Europe and the New World. To b…
I went to a top CS research school and there were several students from China that had such a high language barrier that their papers had to be professionally rewritten by a service the university offered. Their research was Amazing but motivating the problem, describing the methodology, etc all in English just devastated the signal.
So yeah, you’re going to see good quality French writing because French is no longer the lingua Franca of science so a relatively tiny minority of non-French researchers are going to use it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, arithmetic for very young kids like second-graders is probably also a waste of time. If you waited till they're older (or they express a genuine interest) I expect they'd learn it quickly enough and with less chance of learning mainly to hate math. Perhaps it made sense in ye olde days when many students would not go on to junior high.
You mean adding and substracting numbers? Personally I think it should be taught (and is here) to first graders. Also here no kid hates math before 5th grade (overly generalizing).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean adding and substracting numbers? Personally I think it should be taught (and is here) to first graders. Also here no kid hates math before 5th grade (overly generalizing).
It's nice to hear there are places that don't implicitly teach math-hate -- where is it?