You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

komponisto comments on What mathematics to learn - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: Incorrect 23 November 2011 06:14PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (30)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: komponisto 23 November 2011 07:25:19PM *  5 points [-]

the utility of different mathematical concentrations

The answer is highly dependent on one's goals, interests, and personality. Hence there is unlikely to be any particular document which successfully explains the answer in a way that applies to everyone.

What would be better would be for people interested in learning mathematics to post comments explaining the nature of their own particular interest, and to receive individually-tailored replies. If general patterns emerge from those replies, these general patterns can then be extracted and abstracted afterward, preferably with appropriate cautions and disclaimers.

Comment author: RolfAndreassen 23 November 2011 07:51:12PM 3 points [-]

Alternatively or in addition, those who already use some field of mathematics in their daily work might post examples of what they need to know. For example, in physics research I use (off the top of my head) a bit of calculus, considerable statistics, occasional trig, and large amounts of plain symbol-manipulating algebra. The most relevant math skill, perhaps, is that difficult-to-teach intuition, the fingertip-feel of how to manipulate an equation so you get it in a form you can use.

Comment author: jsteinhardt 24 November 2011 08:10:32PM 1 point [-]

Agreed. Advice is trivial to give, especially in the abstract, and therefore likely to have a low signal-to-noise ratio. Extrapolating patterns after dealing with specific instances will probably increase the SNR substantially.