Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
terrytao.wordpress.com
Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
1–10 of 11 posts
Re: Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
#2Inequalities didn't make sense to me. It's harder to understand than the delta-epsilon from the opening, and it doesn't feel like it translates back to a better understanding.
Convergence is presented as just a pattern. It doesn't have to be economic, but the example naturally suggests convergence, so that's ok.
But continuity and differentiability didn't make sense either. You don't "buy" continuity. There's no (increasing) value attached to smaller intervals, at least not in my understanding of it.
Re: Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
#3Inequalities didn't make sense to me. It's harder to understand than the delta-epsilon from the opening, and it doesn't feel like it translates back to a better understanding. Convergence is presented as just a pattern. It doesn't have to be economic, but the example naturally suggests convergence, so that's ok. But continuity and differentiability didn't make sense either. You don't "buy" continuity. There's no (inc…
The metaphor in the post says that, if you have a continuous function and you want to restrict its value to within a very small range, you "pay" for that by restricting the value of the independent variable to a suitably small range. That such a "payment" is possible [phrased another way, that this payment will have the effect you want] is what it means for the function to be continuous.
Re: Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
#4Inequalities didn't make sense to me. It's harder to understand than the delta-epsilon from the opening, and it doesn't feel like it translates back to a better understanding. Convergence is presented as just a pattern. It doesn't have to be economic, but the example naturally suggests convergence, so that's ok. But continuity and differentiability didn't make sense either. You don't "buy" continuity. There's no (inc…
The metaphor in the post says that, if you have a continuous function and you want to restrict its value to within a very small range, you "pay" for that by restricting the value of the independent variable to a suitably small range. That such a "payment" is possible [phrased another way, that this payment will have the effect you want] is what it means for the function to be continuous.
Numerically it makes sense, but I don't have the feeling of cost at all with range restriction. If anything, it should become cheaper.
So, I'm way, way below the Olympic status of Terry Tao, but he might be abstracting a bit too much here. This may not help students understand the topic.
Re: Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
The metaphor in the post says that, if you have a continuous function and you want to restrict its value to within a very small range, you "pay" for that by restricting the value of the independent variable to a suitably small range. That such a "payment" is possible [phrased another way, that this payment will have the effect you want] is what it means for the function to be continuous.
Numerically it makes sense, but I don't have the feeling of cost at all with range restriction. If anything, it should become cheaper. So, I'm way, way below the Olympic status of Terry Tao, but he might be abstracting a bit too much here. This may not help students understand the topic.
People need different metaphors. So it's often good to present students with a slate of them; if one doesn't work, try another.
It's important not to get stuck on the metaphor, but in practice all but the weirdest of us need them to bootstrap into a mathematical intuition.
This one does absolutely nothing for me either; even casting my mindset back to when I first encountered the episilon-delta treatement I don't think this would have helped me. But if it helps others, that's great.
Also, I think this is a concise treatment. If I were to try to present this to a math class, I'd expand it into at least half a class session, if not a full one. Terry Tao is presenting the metaphor fairly directly, not for pedagogical purposes on this post itself. If 3Blue1Brown took this post and ran with it I'm sure a lot more people would find the result useful at that density of presentation.
Re: Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
The metaphor in the post says that, if you have a continuous function and you want to restrict its value to within a very small range, you "pay" for that by restricting the value of the independent variable to a suitably small range. That such a "payment" is possible [phrased another way, that this payment will have the effect you want] is what it means for the function to be continuous.
Numerically it makes sense, but I don't have the feeling of cost at all with range restriction. If anything, it should become cheaper. So, I'm way, way below the Olympic status of Terry Tao, but he might be abstracting a bit too much here. This may not help students understand the topic.
Increased precision typically costs more economically, so I think it's a pretty good analogy... precise physical measurements require specialized equipment, precise floating-point calculations require more computational power, etc
Re: Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
#7> Perhaps readers can propose some other examples of mathematical concepts being re-interpreted as some sort of economic transaction?
On a much more basic level, I plugged in e to formulae throughout my schooling to the age of 18, and only later realised that $e is equal to the amount of interest you'd have on a bank account of $1 if you applied 100% interest continuously compounded.
Re: Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
#8I love Taos writing and I love a good mental model for abstract math, but he somehow seemed to make inequalities more complicated for me. I think based on talks with others that I have a great ability to imagine 2d and 3d spaces. Did this example help you?
Re: Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
#9I love Taos writing and I love a good mental model for abstract math, but he somehow seemed to make inequalities more complicated for me. I think based on talks with others that I have a great ability to imagine 2d and 3d spaces. Did this example help you?
I didn't find these examples particularly illuminating, and I'm also a geometry-forward thinker.
Systems of linear inequalities became transparent to me when I took a class on optimization and learned linear programming from the perspective of polytope geometry.
The basic concept is that you can define a halfspace by a linear inequality of the a^T x Systems of nonlinear inequalities are more complicated but you can sometimes approach them similarly.
This style of thinking is much more approachable for me because I have an easy time playing with these kinds of geometric objects in my head.
Re: Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals"
#10I love Taos writing and I love a good mental model for abstract math, but he somehow seemed to make inequalities more complicated for me. I think based on talks with others that I have a great ability to imagine 2d and 3d spaces. Did this example help you?
I too enjoy reading Tao, but this approach to inequalities did not work for me at all. I am a retired PhD mathematician and I've taught the full gamut of undergraduate math in college. BUT all my life I have struggled with the simplest currency conversion arithmetic when I travel overseas. When I saw Tao's first example I said to myself, if this was how I was introduced to inequalities back in school (long ago) I'd likely have been a history major.