Anyone else have a high interest in math and science but

I have 99 IQ and taught myself up to differential topology and QM.

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 this way too.Tbh I reckon nobody is good at first read comprehension.

>>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".

>>7835104
you sound like a latent mathematician that can't deal with unrigorous bullshit. keep at it, and consider a career in math. all the extra effort you're doing pays off

>>7834910

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.

part 1/2

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

>>7835261

part 2/2

Mathematical Analysis by Apostol

Differential Forms and Applications by do Carmo

Fourier Series and Integrals by Dym and McKean

Functions of One Complex Variable by Conway

Real Analysis: Measure Theory, Integration, and Hilbert Spaces by Stein & Shakarchi

Topology by Munkres

Counterexamples in Topology by Steen and Seebach

Differential Forms in Algebraic Topology by Bott and Tu

Topology from the Differential Viewpoint by Milnor (the last book I completed)

Currently working through Berkeley Problems in Mathematics by Paulo Ney de Souza and Jorge-Nuno Silva.

>>7835266
>>7835261
>cut and paste from the wikia with Sussman's books thrown in

For what purpose?

>>7835272
What do you mean? These were the book recommended to me.

>>7835278
Recommended by the wikia.

>>7835261
>>7835266
It took me about 10 years to complete all of these books.

>>7835283
The wikia wasn't available when I started so I didn't use it for my whole list.

>>7835285
I mean 20 years. I started when I was 16 in high school and now I am 36.

>>7835285
>lying on the internet

>>7835295

The odds that you happen to use exactly the books on the wikia written with the same eccentricities is 0.

>>7835303
I don't know what you are talking about. Show me your proof.

>>7835301
Thanks man, you're an inspiration to dumbasses like myself who didn't take highschool seriously and only recently found out about how fun math can be.

>>7835308

The order is exactly the order of the wikia

>>7835309

He's just some CS major who clearly doesn't know most of that material and is subtlety shilling for Sussman's "learn thru code" books.

>>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.

>>7835321
>Trust me I worked through these books in that exact order.
What kind of retard sits down and reads four introductory linear algebra textbooks in a row
>>7835261

this is obviously BS

>>7835336
You're right, this was a belaruse. Everything I said was a lie. Regarding math, I only know up to multivariate calculus (and currently learning differential equations).

>>7834910
>>7834924
>>7834958
>>7835104
>>7835106
>>7835142
>>7835261
>>7835266
>>7835272
>>7835278
>>7835283
None of these people are me. I don't have an IQ of 99, my real IQ is 200 according to an online test I took.

>>7835350
Wait this guy isn't me.

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.

there's some serious shitposting going on itt

~70 IQ physics professor reporting in

Eye dun tuk a hit to da hed nd eye dun lern so gud no moore

>>7836166
OP here, I didn't mention IQ a single time in my entire post

>"I LOVE SCIENCE BUT I JUST CANT DO MATH"
>"KNEEL DAGRASS TIESUN MAKES IT LOOK SO BEAUTIFUL BUT I COULD NEVER DO MATH PROBLEMS ALL DAY LAWL"

Said everyone who wanted to sound intelligent without being intelligent.

File: 1452819791390.png (329KB, 586x433px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 586x433px

>150 iq
>still not smart enough to compete with people like terrence tao and am incapable of accomplishing anything meaningful in my field

>>7837183

So 99.99% of the shit posters who post about IFLS.

>tfw great at math but suck at physics

Anyone else know this feel? Math is so fun and physics concepts are fun and interesting too; but physics problems are so hard to me.

I could spend hours rearranging here, substituting there, reduce it this way and that way and then substitute this here and I always struggle.

>>7837332
I won't call myself great at math, but I'm much better at math than at physics.

It might just be lack of practice. Physics is cool but I just don't pour the same level of time in that I do for math.

Sadly there's not enough time in the world to learn everything interesting.

>>7837218
IQ is pointless if you do nothing with it.

>>7837332
>>7837346
I'm terrible at math but enjoy physics more than anything else I do.

It's a horrible feeling, but numbers just don't work very well inside my brain, I read them wrong and end up adding in random numbers or taking random numbers away without realizing.

Thinking about it now, it seems similar to dyslexia but I can read and write languages fine.

>>7834910
That sounds about right. Those subjects are on the borderline of what your average retard can do.

>>7837383
dyscalcia is a thing senpai

>>7835308
>Show me your proof.
Ok.

>>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

Yeah, I always liked learning math, but I was never particularly good at it. I wanted to study it, but it's too risky for me to attempt such a thing.

>>7834905
Yeah, me. Please explain:
>>7838594

>>7837183
I can do math but I can't do physics

>>7837833
>implying I didn't spend 17 years going through the first 4 books