The Geniuses' Thread

D4RK ONION

Get the latest version of Adobe Flash player installed on your computer. What browser are you using?

http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/

Konata

Using Chrome. I installed the latest update, all seems to be working now. Thank you!

D4RK ONION

No problemo, mi amigo!

syncosised

Robot Unicorn Attack also crashed Flash for me in Chrome. I'm afraid to touch it in Ubuntu though, it took long enough to get working perfectly in the first place! :O

Aoibheann

This is not only nerdy, but is adorable and happy.

Davidius

Aoibheann wrote: »

This is not only nerdy, but is adorable and happy.

Jaysus, somebody really messed up that baloon-like graph. C- stuff right there.

Aoibheann

Davidius wrote: »

Jaysus, somebody really messed up that baloon-like graph. C- stuff right there.

*narrows eyes*

Konata

Davidius wrote: »

Jaysus, somebody really messed up that baloon-like graph. C- stuff right there.

Shtop ruining the happy vibe!

Davidius

I'm only trying to help by being critical and realistic. Drawing proper baloon shaped graphs is essential to a graduate's success!





















Oh it's a heart.

Pygmalion

Question for you guys.

Kinda bored lately and kinda looking to get more up-to-date on my maths (both learning new stuff and remembering what I forgot since doing the LC), anyone got any good sites, books they'd recommend or anything similar.
I'm of course looking to learn the FUN maths (like calculus, graph theory, perhaps a bit of the old number theory) and none of that loser stuff like probability/statistics.

Also Davidius I expect at least a response from you. Maybe one or two science people too.
Don't disappoint me, boards.

Davidius

Unfortunately I'm not nearly studious enough to use anything but my notes and supplements but I can give some of the recommended texts for some of my modules.

We're recommended Calculus - A Complete Course by Robert A. Adams for my Diff. & Integral Calculus module. However it's worth noting that the module is more about explaining where the basics of calculus come from. Honestly it feels more like LC level with a bit more depth (and designed to seem more confusing than it is).

Looking at the Amazon reviews it either assumes too much knowledge or too little depending on the reader. It also seems on the expensive side. It's supposed to be in the UCD library so I may have a look for myself on Monday.

Another module I have is about problem solving. While it's mostly only about utilising techniques and forming strategies for solving problems it does teach a bit of number theory. Unfortuntaley it assumes you already know a few things, most of which can be explained by wikipedia if you're bothered.

Anyhow he recommends "The Art and Craft of Problem Solving" by Paul Zeitz or "How to Solve it" by George Polya. I'm going to check out the former when I get the chance but I don't imagine either explains a lot about Number Theory itself. "Elemetary Number Theory" by Gareth A. Jones was something that was mentioned in my Number Theory module last semester so I'd say it's definitely something to look into.

I'm afraid I'm a bit useless on the graph theory front, it's a second year module in my case for some reason. Let the fact that I haven't tried learning it independently be a testament to my laziness.

Pygmalion

Davidius wrote: »

Unfortunately I'm not nearly studious enough to use anything but my notes and supplements but I can give some of the recommended texts for some of my modules.

We're recommended Calculus - A Complete Course by Robert A. Adams for my Diff. & Integral Calculus module. However it's worth noting that the module is more about explaining where the basics of calculus come from. Honestly it feels more like LC level with a bit more depth (and designed to seem more confusing than it is).

Ah fair enough, I'll look elsewhere for Calculus (although maybe the "more depth" part is worth looking at), actually may repost this in the Maths forum now and check back tomorrow, I'd probably get more answers there.

Another module I have is about problem solving. While it's mostly only about utilising techniques and forming strategies for solving problems it does teach a bit of number theory. Unfortuntaley it assumes you already know a few things, most of which can be explained by wikipedia if you're bothered.

Anyhow he recommends "The Art and Craft of Problem Solving" by Paul Zeitz or "How to Solve it" by George Polya. I'm going to check out the former when I get the chance but I don't imagine either explains a lot about Number Theory itself. "Elemetary Number Theory" by Gareth A. Jones was something that was mentioned in my Number Theory module last semester so I'd say it's definitely something to look into.

Heard quite a few good things said about "How to Solve it", think I actually had a a PDF of it once but never really got around to starting it. Might get it again :P.

I'm afraid I'm a bit useless on the graph theory front, it's a second year module in my case for some reason. Let the fact that I haven't tried learning it independently be a testament to my laziness.

I only really saw it incidentally to be honest :P.
At some computer nerd thing at which it was mentioned, saw it and immediately decided it was the coolest form of Maths, as it's all graphical and useful .
Don't think there are much dedicated books on it, seems to be a fairly small field, it'd probably get a few chapters in some books on relatred subjects more often than books to itself.

Aoibheann

Are you looking for more proof-y calculus (i.e. analysis) or are you just looking for problems/solutions-y calculus (i.e plain old calculus :P)?

We've done two courses involving calculus this year. One was called "Advanced Calculus" (oh the ironing) in which we uses Thomas' Calculus - that course was the straight problems one. We've also done an Analysis course this year (it basically builds up to doing the fundamental theorem of calculus etc), and Spivaks Calculus was the recommended textbook.

Neither are particularly difficult courses though, but the books may prove moreso!

Pygmalion

Aoibheann wrote: »

Are you looking for more proof-y calculus (i.e. analysis) or are you just looking for problems/solutions-y calculus (i.e plain old calculus :P)?

We've done two courses involving calculus this year. One was called "Advanced Calculus" (oh the ironing) in which we uses Thomas' Calculus - that course was the straight problems one. We've also done an Analysis course this year (it basically builds up to doing the fundamental theorem of calculus etc), and Spivaks Calculus was the recommended textbook.

Neither are particularly difficult courses though, but the books may prove moreso!

Either/Both :P. Proof-y would be a bit more interesting IMO, but what fun is maths without problems?

Looking at getting those books now, Thomas' one doesn't seem to be a problem to get. Wait found the other one too, spelled his name wrong >.>

Aoibheann

Pygmalion wrote: »

Either/Both :P. Proof-y would be a bit more interesting IMO, but what fun is maths without problems?

Looking at getting those books now, Thomas' one doesn't seem to be a problem to get. Wait found the other one too, spelled his name wrong >.>

Proof-y is infinitely cooler. Problems are just applications of proofs.. ¬.¬

Hopefully you'll find them interesting. I'll have a think and see if I can find anything useful for you!

Davidius

I suppose it's worth mentioning that my calculus course is mostly proofs.

Pygmalion

Aoibheann wrote: »

Proof-y is infinitely cooler. Problems are just applications of proofs.. ¬.¬

What is a proof if not the solution to a problem phrased as "Find a proof of P(x)"? Eh?
Also why learn them if you won't apply them?

Both of the above are rhetorical questions btw.

Pygmalion

Davidius wrote: »

I suppose it's worth mentioning that my calculus course is mostly proofs.

Because your course is pretty awesome.
Although problems are fun for when you're not in the mood for anything too taxing or new (which I'm sure doesn't apply to you maths-studs ).

Aoibheann

Pygmalion wrote: »

What is a proof if not the solution to a problem phrased as "Find a proof of P(x)"? Eh?
Also why learn them if you won't apply them?

Both of the above are rhetorical questions btw.

I feel (and assume my lecturers do, as they use this method very frequently), that all of your questions can be answered by the following:

*magic hands*

That, or 42. :pac:

syncosised

I'd recommend reading Fermat's Last Theorem. I found it very interesting. It pretty much gives you a whole history of Maths and some of the stuff in it gets pretty complicated. Definitely a lighter read than the rest, you won't need to have a pen and paper beside you for it!

For those interested, Fermat's Last Theorem states that no three positive integers a, b, and c can satisfy the equation a^n + b^n = c^n for any integer value of n greater than two (thank you, Wikipedia).

As for textbooks, we were recommended Adams as mentioned earlier, but I don't think I ever used it once. If I ever need a Maths book it's Engineering Mathematics by K.A. Stroud. A massive book, it has pretty much everything you'd ever need! And if you need more, there's Advanced Engineering Mathematics by K.A. Stroud!

sock puppet

Pygmalion wrote: »

none of that loser stuff like probability/statistics.

That stung. What a post to wake up to:(

D4RK ONION

9x-7i>3(3x-7u), solve for i

Jako8

D4RK ONION wrote: »

9x-7i>3(3x-7u), solve for i

9x - 7i>9x - 21u
nines cancel.
-7i>-21u
change inequality when you change signs
i<3u

Oh very clever.

Pygmalion

Jako8 wrote: »

9x - 7i>9x - 21u
nines cancel.
-7i>-21u
change inequality when you change signs
i<3u

Oh very clever.

It's actually a trick question, you can't have inequalities with imaginary numbers.

D4RK ONION

EED wrote:

it was not being used as an imaginary number! very clearly!!! it is just being used as a symbol the same as x and u!

The person who showed it me's words not mine

Davidius

They clearly have no appreciation for convention.

earleuginedoyle

most definatly not convention is only fun when you can play around with it

D4RK ONION

And there she is! You get em EED!

Jay P

Pygmalion wrote: »

It's actually a trick question, you can't have inequalities with imaginary numbers.

Well, that's not technically true. In the original question, i was never defined as the square root of -1, or as an element of the complex numbers. i is just a variable in the equation.

syncosised

Discuss.