be honest with me /sci/ is it possible to learn all of calc

>tfw you were making this thread on /sci/ exactly a year ago
Good times, good times.
I failed the class by the way

>>8516239
If you are a quick learner and don't care at all about justifying a single theorem, then yes.

>>8516239
Yup. I did it last year and pulled an A in honours calc III (so a little analysis) by the skin of my teeth. I started studying 4 days before the test after not attending class for a month and a half. I remember asking this exact question a year ago...I was shitting myself and feeling like the world's biggest brainlet

>>8516242
OH FUCK
>>8516244
oh whew
fuck the theorems
>>8516245
i haven't gone to class since oct 8

>>8516250
>i haven't gone to class since oct 8
You'll be okay. A week is a long fucking time. You could probably start on Tuesday and still pull an A/A+

>>8516242
>>8516245
Nani?!
>>8516250
I belive in you, OP

Do it you absolute madman

I didn't quite do what you are trying to op, but I didn't attend a single class for my ODEs course. I binge studied the material the weekend before each exam and ended up with an A in the course.

>>8516255
thanks lads. im gonna make it

>>8516274
To clarify, we had 3 exams + a final. So that means I studied all the material in essentially 8 days.

>>8516239
>.gif
>not animated

no you wont, for being a bad person.

depends on how good at studying you are and if you have all the material ready to be studied

it's not that hard of a subject though, some of the topics in calc 3 are the easiest of all of calculus

>>8516239
Day 1: Vector Geometry
Day 2: Partial Differentiation
Day 3: Lagrange Multipliers
Day 4: Multiple Integrals
Day 5: Vector Calculus

if you have NO IDEA whatsoever about partial differentiation and closed loop/double integrals then you're in for a bad time.

Otherwise, yeah its doable. I just studied about 40% of my calc course over the last 3 days and could probably apply it given a little headscratching on my exam

xD

its possible desu.

the first half of calc 3 is easy pz.

the second half is where it gets a bit challenging with multiple integrals and vector calc.

just use paul and hope for the best. u probably wont get an A though

>>8516328
Combine 2 and 3, push up 4, focus on 5 on day 4 and 5

>>8516239
>purchase graphing calculator
>plug it into your computer
>create a program in BASIC to solve each type of problem from the major chapters of your text book
>easy A

>>8516239
If you cannot do the homework, you cannot do the exam.

>Tfw taking calc III in high school
It's trivial

>>8516637
>>easy A
lol no, because you can't show the steps.

they are grading you on your UNDERSTANDING of calculus, not "can you push these buttons on your calculator?"

>>8516668
if you wrote the program to solve the problems as I suggested then you'll have no issue showing the steps
if you forget just open the source to refresh your memory

this way you only have to figure out how the thing is solved once, and then put it on your calculator
as opposed to having to cram like crazy and actually retain all the knowledge during the test

>>8516239
if you know calc 1 rest is just
changing limits
doing the same thing more times

American education really is a joke, I'd like to see these "math tests" where it takes a "genius" just 2-4 days to end up with an A.

All of you fuckers should be forced through 5 semester of real analysis just as we are.

>>8517325
>5 semester of real analysis just as we are
u r a fucking idiot

>>8516324
depends on how natural he is with mathematics, convoluted with your terms.

>>8517325
> real analysis is hard

Puzzles > calculating large numbers mentally > calculating large numbers on paper > real analysis

Real analysis IS semantics and if you know basic grammar and substitution rules you can write very "advanced" math that would otherwise be random trivial gibberish if you tried it numerically. So no, real analysis is not hard. Linguistifying math makes it easier, not harder. You're only impressing illiterate engineers and humanities majors who both literally think induction is magic.

>>8517639
>sudoku is harder that what was the bleeding edge of math 100 years ago
OK bro.

>>8517325
>5 semester of real analysis
2 is ok, 5 is too much for such a dry, unexiting field

>>8517645

Sudoku IS harder than real analysis. Go is harder than real analysis. I've played some "where's waldo" that is harder than real analysis. You're just mystified by the deliberately esoteric sounding jargon. You can "do" real analysis without knowing anything about numerical math, which is why I am mocking its difficulty. You can literally plug in all the real analysis terms into a sentence generator and get "deep" results. Very hard indeed.

>>8516637
few reputable schools will let you use a calculator on a test
i went to uc irvine and was never once allowed to use on any basic math/physics exam
that was nine classes

>>8516239
What is Calc 3? is it multivariable?
Yea, you could.

File: image.gif (292KB, 200x113px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 200x113px

>>8519099
>reputable
>uc Irvine

>>8517639
Explain to me how understanding of 70 proofs similar to something like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitali_covering_lemma
is in any way considered fucking easy, while having to work through the hardest math problems constantly, pretending brainlet.

American education really is a joke,
working with American mathematicians, I am a computer and telecommunications engineer , and I realize that the level of preparedness of Americans is really low, they can not even do the math in our heads, they need the calculator on everything

>>8519170
That's just for one semester btw, and I'm in a physics program.

>>8516244
>there are theorems in calc 3
fucking LORD my school sucks

I don't think my professor's even SAID the word theorem all semester.

>>8519382
so you didn't learn about green's or stokes thingies?

>>8519382
>He evaluated double and triple integrals without proving Fubini's Theorem
What kind of school did you go to

>>8519487
one for regular people

>>8519864
Even in my high school they would prove why y' of 1/x =ln(x) and prove the Taylor series
Why wouldn't they in college?

>>8519896
Well if you're saying that "prove" is the same thing as showing the derivation then yeah they do that in college

depends on how far your class got
my university is shit so id say yes but yknow we only covered 1/3 what calc 3 should be covering

>>8519896
We got told about the double / triples but he just sort of glossed over why. I guess he said "theorem" when he said "There's a theorem but we're not going to go into it".

We went over all of the basic derivatives but not any of the more complicated ones like ln(x). Again, glossed over.

I think the program is really more tailored towards engineering at my school, so they're more into the whole "here's an equation, solve it" part of things. We don't really have a math department. I literally can't take more than ~2 math courses per semester because there aren't any more.

>>8516658
>tfw took remedial geometry in 12th grade
Also mods he is underage

>>8519382
What retard school do you attend?

>>8516242
hahahahaha faggot

>>8519382
I think you're just a retard who doesn't know a theorem is