Liberal Forum

Skans » 28 Jan 2025, 4:35 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025, 4:35 pm

You said it before I could!  After I posted that, I thought the same thing. Both are excellent.

After screwing up Trig-Analytic Geometry in 12th grade, I grew fearful of math.  I was doing great until I got halfway through.  Then, I was sooo freaking lost. I really need to go back and re-learn that stuff.  I think I'll make that my next goal.  My highest math was Calc 2.  I even figured out how to use it in various applications.  I have watched videos on Matrices and Differential Equations.   I really do need to plug my Trig-Analyt hole, though.

If you were doing problems in Diff equations, then you have what it takes for advanced math.

My favorite was topology. That is more pure math than applied math. Though it does have some fantastic applications. Check it out - in topology, a math professor proved that you could turn a sphere inside out without cutting a slit in the sphere. That is to say, if you had a tennis ball, and the ball was made of zero resistance malleable material, then it is theoretically possible to turn it inside out without cutting a slit in it. That blows my mind. 

Vegas » 28 Jan 2025, 4:40 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025, 4:40 pm

If you were doing problems in Diff equations, then you have what it takes for advanced math.

My favorite was topology. That is more pure math than applied math. Though it does have some fantastic applications. Check it out - in topology, a math professor proved that you could turn a sphere inside out without cutting a slit in the sphere. That is to say, if you had a tennis ball, and the ball was made of zero resistance malleable material, then it is theoretically possible to turn it inside out without cutting a slit in it. That blows my mind.

I get Diff equations when I watch someone doing them.  And, I may have used them for a short time when I took an advanced Economics course. 

To me, advanced math is that stuff nuclear/quantum physicists use.  I'm pretty sure I can ever build up to that. And, even if I could grasp a little of it, I know I could never think in terms of that math.  Not like those people who live and breath that stuff.  Not even close.

I suppose I have to be satisfied some day fully learning what I flubbed up in Trig-Analyt in highschool.
 
 

Vegas » 28 Jan 2025, 4:40 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025, 4:40 pm

If you were doing problems in Diff equations, then you have what it takes for advanced math.

My favorite was topology. That is more pure math than applied math. Though it does have some fantastic applications. Check it out - in topology, a math professor proved that you could turn a sphere inside out without cutting a slit in the sphere. That is to say, if you had a tennis ball, and the ball was made of zero resistance malleable material, then it is theoretically possible to turn it inside out without cutting a slit in it. That blows my mind.

Yeah, it blows my mind too!  Physically, I can't picture it in my mind.  Mathematically, I think I'd be crying in my soup. Certainly very interesting, though.  Now you will have me thinking about turning a sphere inside out while I'm trying to fall asleep tonight. About the best I think I can achieve with that is a good nights sleep.
 

Skans » 28 Jan 2025, 5:06 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025, 5:06 pm

I get Diff equations when I watch someone doing them.  And, I may have used them for a short time when I took an advanced Economics course. 

To me, advanced math is that stuff nuclear/quantum physicists use.  I'm pretty sure I can ever build up to that. And, even if I could grasp a little of it, I know I could never think in terms of that math.  Not like those people who live and breath that stuff.  Not even close.

I suppose I have to be satisfied some day fully learning what I flubbed up in Trig-Analyt in highschool.

I wouldn't use your performance in high school as an accurate metric to your aptitude in mathematics or anything else. Our brains haven't fully developed yet. In fact, the science is now saying that we actually don't have our brains fully developed until we around 28. That makes a difference in learning abstract concepts. 

Skans » 28 Jan 2025, 5:09 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025, 5:09 pm

Yeah, it blows my mind too!  Physically, I can't picture it in my mind.  Mathematically, I think I'd be crying in my soup. Certainly very interesting, though.  Now you will have me thinking about turning a sphere inside out while I'm trying to fall asleep tonight. About the best I think I can achieve with that is a good nights sleep.

You can probably find some animations of it on Youtube somewhere. It will give an accurate picture of it all. 

Vegas » 28 Jan 2025, 5:12 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025, 5:12 pm

You can probably find some animations of it on Youtube somewhere. It will give an accurate picture of it all.

I'm too freaking curious not to.  
 

Vegas » 28 Jan 2025, 4:13 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025, 4:13 pm

This is why people will get dumber. However, don't blame AI for that. It's the user's decision to be a lazy ***. 

AI can teach you whatever you want to learn, but you have to put in the work.

If you want to learn to code, then AI will teach you, but you have to put in the work.
If you want to learn math, then AI will teach you, but you have to put in the work.
If you want to learn how to speak another language, then AI will teach you, but you have to put in the work. 

...


...

Etc....

 

Each of those sentences have exactly the hurdle to which I refer.
People are getting lazier and more apathetic as time goes on.

As the industrial revolution matured, people dreamed of less work and more leisure time.
Four generations later we have become complacent, stupid, less teachable.
AI won't make that anything but worse.

Gark achh ackcchh Garch

Go to Mars. Let the Meek Inherit the worthless Earth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vSCJ9vKICQ

DeezerShoove » 28 Jan 2025, 7:04 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025, 7:04 pm

AI won't make that anything but worse.

This ^^^ is where you are wrong. You are blaming the wrong thing. We will make things worse and use AI to do it. AI is brilliant. We can't put any blame on AI simply because people are lazy assholes. That is no different than the lib idiots who blame the guns for gun violence instead of the person behind the gun. 

Vegas » 28 Jan 2025, 9:31 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025, 9:31 pm

This ^^^ is where you are wrong. You are blaming the wrong thing. We will make things worse and use AI to do it. AI is brilliant. We can't put any blame on AI simply because people are lazy assholes. That is no different than the lib idiots who blame the guns for gun violence instead of the person behind the gun.

You are missing what I'm getting at.
AI in and of itself is an inanimate object (sort of).
I'm referring to exactly the same thing you are: People will **** it up.

I make connections that aren't necessarily apparent sometimes.
It's just me channeling my inner Sole Result (with better sentence structure).

Like the field of medical technology.
Wonderful that they can replace the face of an idiot whose pet monkey flipped out and ripped hers off.
But they can also fake a broad's twat on a 6ft tall idiot with size 14 feet and call him Suzy.

Just because we can, we do it... Is it good? Depends on the **** making the case.
My **** views or your **** views will clash.