I have really shitty initial comprehension skills. As in i will need to have something explained multiple times or have to study something in proper context to understand it. However when i do understand it, i understand better than most other people. Not sure if this is a condition.
>>7834924 I'm like this too. I guess it has something to do with the way our brain works and what we enjoy and find rewarding during the learning process.
I think many people that are considered super quick are actually good at extracting general ideas and summarizing stuff in their head. They also have a very good working memory. This looks impressive to me because I can't do that.
I need to have a deep understanding of the stuff to be comfortable using it. That does not make me a very efficient learner. I see gaps and inconsistencies where most people don't so I ask a lot of questions. And I probably look like a dumbass when I do that. I often try to redo all mathematical proofs by myself using my own intuitive approach. Once I've gone through that, I tend not to forget anything and I'm able to use that knowledge in any context. I suppose that makes me a very out-of-the-box thinker.
I guess it takes different skills to be able to do one or the other and I have no idea which correlates more with your definition of "intelligence".
This implies both great determination and a very large amount of free time to absorb the material, since my general idea of intelligence is that it's like a speed level for picking up and fully understanding new ideas. But the language is also unusual in the sense that you say that you self-taught, which just can't be true for all of it, but could be true for much of it.
Anyway your post has me curious and I'd like you to say more about yourself if you want. I also honestly don't know what "differential topology" is as such, but now I'll see if it's a thing.
>>7835142 Here's a list of books in the order that I worked them in (it took me years to go through these). They're all in order from my notes so I'll just list them off. I never took algebra in high school or even finished high school technically so I decided to buy/rent/borrow books to improve myself, currently I am working on my BS in math.
Precalculus: Mathematics for Calculus by Stewart
How to Solve It: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method by Polya
Elementary Calculus: An Infinitesimal Approach by Jerome Keisler
University Physics with Modern Physics by Young and Freedman
Functional Differential Geometry by Sussman
Ordinary Differential Equations by Tenenbaum & Pollard
A First Course in Complex Analysis with Applications by Zill and Shanahan
Visual Complex Analysis by Needham
A Course of Modern Analysis by Whittaker and Watson
Special Functions by X. Z. Wang and Guo
The Fourier Transform & Its Applications by Bracewell
Calculus of Variations: with Applications to Physics and Engineering by Weinstock
Linear Algebra Done Wrong by Sergei Treil
Linear Algebra and Its Applications by Strang
Linear Algebra by Shilov
Linear Algebra Done Right by Axler
Applied Partial Differential Equations: With Fourier Series and Boundary Value Problems by Haberman
Partial Differential Equations by Evans
The Feynman Lectures on Physics
Structure and Interpretation of Classical Mechanics by Sussman
Introduction to Electrodynamics by David Griffiths
Introduction to Modern Optics by Fowles
An Introduction to Modern Astrophysics by Carrol
Principles of Quantum Mechanics by Shankar
A Transition to Advanced Mathematics by Smith, Eggen, and St. Andre
Conjecture and Proof by Laczkovich
Visual Group Theory by Carter
Algebra by Artin
Abstract Algebra by Herstein
Algebra by Hungerford
Counterexamples in Analysis by Gelbaum and Olmsted
The Cauchy-Schwarz Master Class: An Introduction to the Art of Mathematical Inequalities by Steele
>>7835317 No, his books are really good. Trust me I worked through these books in that exact order. I haven't checked the wikia but I am guessing they choose the order I did because it is a mostly conventional order. I read through the PDF file of the order that is more efficient written by
>>7835321 >Trust me I worked through these books in that exact order
No one would ever read Evan's PDE book without a damn good foundation in analysis. Most of the books are grouped by subject and not the natural order you would read them in which leads me to conclude that you don't have any more than the most cursory knowledge of math and physics and are unaware that they revisit the same subjects repeated in greater depth in their education unlike CS.
As a kid I was diagnosed with an IQ of 88 or something, now my official diagnosed IQ which I did a year ago was 104, IQ is bullshit anyways and 99% of the people who claim to have an 140+ IQ on the internet just took some bs online test.
>>7834905 idk why you people talk about IQ so much. Anybody with enough free time, determination and interest in a subject can learn the material. In a world where everything is online and most people have access to the materials, you can teach yourself anything. Unless something is mentally wrong with you, everybody has the same capacity to learn something if they want to.
>>7835261 >Here's a list of books in the order that I worked them in >part 1/2 >the 5th book >Functional Differential Geometry >Publisher: The MIT Press (July 5, 2013) >2013 >It took me about 10 years >I mean 20 years. >in the order that I worked them in >2013
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.