I'm finding calculus I quite confusing even in the first

>>9149705
Also how do I solve 15? Just like flop the shit around n whatnot?

>>9149705

>1

just offset it by 1 jesus man

>>9149705
>I'm finding calculus I quite confusing even in the first week.
Okay.
>I think my Stewart book isn't always clear.
Stewart (and its ilk) are invariably written like shit because someone figured out that students never read the textbook and rely on notes and examples like class. So you are forced to buy a $200 (or whatever) brick. It should be easy to write a good, terse and entertaining book on calculus, yet all intro calc textbooks end up being bloated monstrosities with hundreds of pages of useless text and bad examples.
>But, I'm probably struggling because I haven't taken any math in eight years and I never took pre-calc in high school.
lmao XD want a medal?
>I have a BA in linguistics and I'm currently doing pre-reqs for a CS MS. What do you suggest I do to prepare for this?
The best way to learn calculus is to do calc problems. Weird huh?
You will also need to learn trig. Knowing basic trig identities (SOH CAH TOA, cos^2(x)+sin^2(x)=1, half angle formulas, unit circle shit and a few others) is a prereq for almost every calc class.
>pic related
Why are you confused by the number 1?

Take the function e^x, make it half as big, flip it around the x axis, flip it around the y axis and then move it up by 1. Basically what the Harlem Globetrotters to do my mom when I'm at my dad's house.

File: feel.png (42KB, 1285x1279px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 1285x1279px

>>9149707

there exercises are literally made to make you think in a way to visualize the graphs to understand calculus better

>tfw today is the last day to decide if i wanna stick with calc 1 or drop it and get my $515 back

good luck to you op

>>9149756
>It should be easy to write a good, terse and entertaining book on calculus
You do it then.

Well, first you need to know what e^(-x) looks like. In particular, when x = 0, e^(-x) evaluates to 1. As x → +infinity, e^(-x) goes to 0, and as x → -infinity, e^(-x) goes to infinity.

Then you need to know what happens when you multiply by 1/2.
Then you need to know what happens to a graph when you multiply by a negative.
Then you need to shift the entire graph up by 1 unit.

>>9149786
this

this faggot is retarded holy shit

>>9149809
mate he stated he hasn't taken a math class in 8 years

starting with calc isn't too good of an idea, doesn't really make him retarded, just underestimated the work.

Wait wait wait. You're doing a master's in computer science, but you never took precalc, the math that is usually the introduction to matrix arithmetic? Plus, if your calculus course is worth anything at all, it will probably give you some somewhat involved trigonometry in your problems. I'm guessing you don't remember that after 8+ years though.

>>9149802
They already exists but they're not used with plebs, which is 90% of the problem. If we taught mathematics as a reasoning system instead of an autistic calculation system from 1st grade onward no one would have a problem with books like Spivak.

Not to say that Spivak isn't shit, but at least it's better than the anxiety-inducing negative reinforcement chamber that is the typical Stewart or Stewart-inspired curriculum.

File: 1503244532134-fit.jpg (111KB, 564x846px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 564x846px

>Linguist
>can't even understand basic math

Fuck off

Honestly, you should at the very lest take precalc, if not trig and precalc before taking calc. Especially if you are studying CS.

You'll spend too much time stuck on algebra and trig shit to appreciate what is actually going on and what you are learning. It is certainly possible for someone to just walk into a calc 1 class in any american university and pass with a c because there are too many retards that they need to push through it. But if you take calc 2 you're going to be fucked because everyone will expect you to have mastered algebra and trig inside and out by the time you get to calc 2.

It's better to take it slow and understand what's going on. We have too many people who don't care about actually learning and just care about getting a piece of paper.

>>9149705
It might not be too late to get into a pre-calc class this semester.

File: CS can't into calc.png (55KB, 695x378px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 695x378px

>>9149705
>I'm currently doing pre-reqs for a CS MS

Every single time.

>>9149920
I don't understand how someone could do 4 years of comp sci without thinking its a good idea to take some math. I only ever took one CS course and realized quickly how far a good math background can go for it.

>>9149705
it's the number 1, OP

>>9149864
>They already exist
Can you suggest one?

>>9149707

Start with an easier version of that problem, and build yourself up to it.

>What does the graph of e^x look like?

This you need to know. If you don't, then you're precalc/Algebra classes were inadequate.

>What does e^(-x) look like?

This is just the e^x graph, but flipped about the y-axis.

>What does 0.5*e^(-x) look like?

This is just the previous graph, but stretched by a factor of 0.5 (compressed, in this case).

>What does -0.5*e^(-x) look like?

The previous graph, but now flipped about the x-axis.

>What does 1-0.5*e^(-x) look like?

The previous graph, but shifted upward by 1.