/g/ can you educate me on maths. I went though the wiki and downloaded

>>60173988
I have a simple advice for you. Do not be afraid to begin from zero. If a book states XYZ and you don't understand what XYZ means then go and learn the meaning of X then Y then Z. And when you go to learn the meaning of X and it states ABC, go and learn A, B, and C. Do not be afraid to go as low as basic elementary school math. You'd be surprised by how many things you missed thanks to the generally shit poor education when it comes to math.
Good luck!

File: 1446900605475.jpg (8KB, 241x209px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 241x209px

>>60174060
what about when there is only bits and pieces of high school stuff you've forgotten. So you go back to fill those gaps but now suddenly everything seems important so you just decide to study everything for the heck of it as a revision. But then the shit just never finishes and you never get to the good stuff. It just depresses you and you sort of give up.

>>60173988
Complete all of Project Euler

>>60174115
>It just depresses you and you sort of give up.

If you are that much of a pussy when it comes to learning something that will help you make a somebody out of yourself one day then I suggest that you drop out. Nothing is easy in life.

>>60174060
Likely to be stuck as elementary maths is based on some complex proofs. For example 1+1=2 1+2=3 1+3=4.... is based on some very complex inductive proofs.

>>60174146
It's not that complex. 2 is just a shorthand notation for 1+1. Adding 1 just gives you the next symbol, which is 3 and so on.

>>60173988
This guy:
>>60174060
gets it. The root of most difficulties in mathematics are set in misconceptions of the fundamentals. Early life mathematics education is terrible, not least as it starts with applied mathematics rather than the foundations of algebra (and numbers) - so you end up developing (or not) an intuitive grasp of how numbers work, without understanding what they are.

Following on from this, they then try to describe more complex mathematics (differentials, logarithms etc.) by rule and analogy - unable to explain them from first principles are you never learnt the foundations of algebra.

So yeah, if you're confused go and look at what confuses you, do not be afraid to go down to first principles. For examples and solutions (applied) you may want to look at the HELM workbooks (mainly aimed at engineers, but generally good for anyone trying to learn mathematics). You can find them here: http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/jav/soton/HELM/helm_workbooks.html

Finally, make sure you get your brain working in terms of algebra - I've noticed people have a mental block when they're not 'working with numbers'. This is completely artificial, you do not need to work in numbers, but you do need to understand what an algebra is.

Take a look at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFC
You won't understand that, but eventually you will - the point I'm looking to illustrate by showing it to you is that mathematics is a symbolism governed by axioms. It is not inherently meaningful, it does not add meaning or definition to a statement, it only expresses logical relations exactly AND is self consistent (on the whole) such that you have a process of formal derivation and proof. Do not imagine mathematics to be more or less than it is.

This appears to be a relevant set of notes on foundations of algebra an integers: http://www.cims.nyu.edu/~naor/homepage%20files/integers.pdf

>>60174117
all problem above 100 are crazy hard and can rarely be bruteforced

>>60174060
This deserves a screencap.

>>60174136
if i was a pussy then why would i get obsessed with studying everything. What a retarded simplistic post though from somebody who thinks nothing is easy in life.

>>60174209
How do you justify that as you keep adding one to a number it increases without it purely based on a flimsy inductive assumption?

>>60173988
Start all the way from the beginning on Khan Academy

>>60174223
Thanks man!

>>60174254
>if i was a pussy then why would i get obsessed with studying everything

Probably because you thought it was easier than it actually is. Then you found out the hard way, then you pussied out

>>60174115
I know that feel.

Still don't know what shit like quadractic formula (b^2 - 4ac) is good for. I never, ever applied it to anything but math tests

File: wtf am i reading.png (350KB, 1192x876px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 1192x876px

>>60174223
How do I learn formal logic?

Whenever I try to read algorithms papers they're filled with thick notation I can't make any sense out of. I have no idea what it's about or what meaning it's trying to communicate. I've been told that academic authors get paid to write unreadable papers, and to learn formal logic.

I want to implement and possibly modify the algorithm, add additional semantics to it. I assume that would require parsing that notation, understanding it and finally extending it in a way that remains consistent. Is this how new math/algorithms papers are born?

>>60178700
Hey man, check out Precalculus mathematics by Simmons. It covers all the basics and then expand from there!

>>60173988
http://4chan-science.wikia.com/wiki/Mathematics#Precalculus

>>60178793
I know calculus and most of those symbols still don't mean anything to me.

>>60181171
read a book on proofs

>>60181502
That sounds awfully boring, anon-kun

>>60174223

You don't teach kids how to count starting with Peano's axioms for the natural numbers the same way you wouldn't appreciate learning about the integers as the initial object in the category of commutative rings with identity. That's not how our brain works.
The abstract way is good and necessary, but only after a certain point.

>>60178700
http://www.logicmatters.net/tyl

Im not op but thank you all for impact, i Will be sure to use information itt

>>60178700
>formal logic
I really liked Mendelson's "Introduction to Mathematical Logic". Covers propositional logic, first order logic, basics of set theory and arithmetics (enough for Gödel's theorems) quite nicely. There's also part on computability in the end, though I kind of skipped it.

>>60178266
The Quadratic Formula will tell you where a function in the form f(x) = ax^2 + bx + c crosses the x-axis or in other words when ax^2 + bx + c = 0.

The quadratic formula is important because it gives a solution to second order linear equations.

1st Order: f(x) = ax + b
2nd Order: f(x) = ax^2 + bx + c
3rd Order: f(x) = ax^3 + bx^2 + cx + d
And so on...

Side note: Notice that a parabola f(x) = ax^2 + c is just a 2nd order linear equation where b is 0

>working through Khan Academy
>realize that all these concepts make a lot more sense and are actually related to each other when you're working through it at a reasonable rate instead of spending a month on something you can learn in 2 hours

Public schools are shit.

>>60182579
might as well be speaking arabic, bruv

>>60174344
you justify that with an axiom.

>>60183982
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_induction#Axiom_of_induction

>>60176437
underestimating the time required to finish something is pussying out apparently. It's so much safer to replace the i's with you's, in other words projecting much.

>>60174344
Hume, pls. Induction, while definitely flawed, is a useful tool.

>>60178700
take a discrete math course.

>>60182579
Who cares about solving polynomials
Haven't done that since forever, not once was it in a real life situation
Can you show me an example of this being used in real world every day matters