Jump to content

Why do people hate mathematics?


Guest

Recommended Posts

Honestly, the average person and even most professionals can get away with just knowing how to do a derivative/integral. I can't think of many situations where anyone but someone working in a math or physics fields would use matrices, Laplace transfers, high degree integrals/derivatives, etc.

Speaking as someone who has "seen it all," I personally think that linear algebra (matrices) is the most under-rated branch of mathematics, that is most useful for practically everything but gets taught way too late (so it's introduced piecemeal as an arcane, confusing mystery wherever it naturally occurs in every other subject field). Compared to real and complex analysis (extensions of calculus), I wish I had been taught, and grokked, linear algebra much earlier on --- it's far more useful than facility with the technicalities of analytic integration. Understanding matrices is the "missing link" between simplistic, one-dimensional textbook examples and all real-world, multi-dimensional applications.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Honestly, the average person and even most professionals can get away with just knowing how to do a derivative/integral. I can't think of many situations where anyone but someone working in a math or physics fields would use matrices, Laplace transfers, high degree integrals/derivatives, etc.

Speaking as someone who has "seen it all," I personally think that linear algebra (matrices) is the most under-rated branch of mathematics, that is most useful for practically everything but gets taught way too late (so it's introduced piecemeal as an arcane, confusing mystery wherever it naturally occurs in every other subject field). Compared to real and complex analysis (extensions of calculus), I wish I had been taught, and grokked, linear algebra much earlier on --- it's far more useful than facility with the technicalities of analytic integration. Understanding matrices is the "missing link" between simplistic, one-dimensional textbook examples and all real-world, multi-dimensional applications.

It's been a while since I've done any matrix problems so I can't recall their specific usefulness. Can you think of a common real world application for them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate maths because I don't understand a lot of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a while since I've done any matrix problems so I can't recall their specific usefulness. Can you think of a common real world application for them?

OK; my ideas of "real world applications" might be a bit skewed as an experimental physicist, but here goes...

- understanding correlation and covariance matrices are fundamental to fitting real-world multidimensional datasets (and understanding what the results mean); you can't properly interpret any statistical analysis without matrices

- anything in engineering requiring consideration in three dimensions, such as stress/strain calculations

- most of quantum mechanics reduces from "massive confusingness" to "trivial tautologies" when you understand linear algebra

- all of signals processing (convolutions, FFTs, etc.)

- just like in one dimensions, nearly everything is approximately a parabola (think Taylor's Theorem), every problem in higher dimensions is approximately a quadratic equation with matrix instead of scalar terms

If you're just balancing a checkbook, then matrices aren't any more useful than integrals of trigonometric functions. But for anything in a science/engineering/data-analysis field, I think understanding linear algebra is much more important than facility with calculus (beyond the basic conceptual level, and knowing how to plug harder calculus calculations into an appropriate computer program to do the hard parts).

Link to post
Share on other sites

tumblr_ma3yj9ZImO1qgwqw9o1_500.png

Pretty much me when I graduated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've taken our higher level steel/concrete design courses and I don't recall using matrices for anything. I think the worse we had to use was a quad formula, otherwise it was all specialized equations. Honestly, even as an engineer I don't see any of those examples as being common applications. Who knows, maybe our 2D/3D hydraulic software does it internally and I just don't realize it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Infinite Tree
Ugh, mathematics is the worst. Nine times out of ten if I have a conjecture it's either completely false or well beyond my patience to prove or simply unprovable. Mathematics doesn't care how creative you are; you have to be lucky enough to pick a problem that is solvable (and hopefully interesting) and then be lucky enough to have the right stupid insight that makes the problem obvious. But make sure to do all the background reading in the field because if the problem is solvable and obvious and important enough for people to care, someone's probably already solved it.


Mathematics has also left me highly attuned to flaws in arguments, confused about the nature of semantics (in mathematics, words get their meaning from a formal definition, whereas real-world definitions are necessarily vague), and trying to abstract and analyze the structure of real world situations (for instance, the problem of seating a group of people at a table is actually a graph embedding problem generalizing the travelling salesman problem (you could also rewrite it as a linear algebra problem if you so desired)).


But I suppose I shouldn't be complaining about getting paid for doing what I'd probably do anyway if it weren't my job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've taken our higher level steel/concrete design courses and I don't recall using matrices for anything. I think the worse we had to use was a quad formula, otherwise it was all specialized equations. Honestly, even as an engineer I don't see any of those examples as being common applications. Who knows, maybe our 2D/3D hydraulic software does it internally and I just don't realize it.

Yes, the software had darn better be doing the matrix math for you, otherwise it can't handle concepts like stress which are fundamentally matrix quantities. This is why I consider linear algebra ("matrices") "underrated" --- because people don't learn about them earlier on, things that would be simple concepts are turned into "specialized equations" where you see some ugly, arcane formula without understanding the reasoning behind it.

For a practical example of the stress matrix, imagine holding (or, even better, actually hold) a block of some material in your hands. What kind of external forces can you apply to it? Well, you can stretch or squeeze in in any of the X, Y, or Z directions. You can also twist (torque) it in the XZ, YZ, or XY planes --- all of which introduce a particular form of stress on the material. To generally describe any kind of stress you can apply, any combination of squeeze/stretch and twist in any direction, you need a stress tensor, represented by a symmetric matrix with 6 independent elements (3 stretch/squeeze components, and 3 torque components). Any kind of force you apply to the outside of the material results in stress forces within the material that can be locally described at each point by a stress tensor, indicating the amount/directions of stretch/squeeze and torque/twist at every point in the material (determining how it will deform or break under load). Your 2D/3D software figures out what will happen by calculating how this tensor stress is distributed through the material as a function of external forces.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Calligraphette_Coe
I've taken our higher level steel/concrete design courses and I don't recall using matrices for anything. I think the worse we had to use was a quad formula, otherwise it was all specialized equations. Honestly, even as an engineer I don't see any of those examples as being common applications. Who knows, maybe our 2D/3D hydraulic software does it internally and I just don't realize it.

Yes, the software had darn better be doing the matrix math for you, otherwise it can't handle concepts like stress which are fundamentally matrix quantities. This is why I consider linear algebra ("matrices") "underrated" --- because people don't learn about them earlier on, things that would be simple concepts are turned into "specialized equations" where you see some ugly, arcane formula without understanding the reasoning behind it.

For a practical example of the stress matrix, imagine holding (or, even better, actually hold) a block of some material in your hands. What kind of external forces can you apply to it? Well, you can stretch or squeeze in in any of the X, Y, or Z directions. You can also twist (torque) it in the XZ, YZ, or XY planes --- all of which introduce a particular form of stress on the material. To generally describe any kind of stress you can apply, any combination of squeeze/stretch and twist in any direction, you need a stress tensor, represented by a symmetric matrix with 6 independent elements (3 stretch/squeeze components, and 3 torque components). Any kind of force you apply to the outside of the material results in stress forces within the material that can be locally described at each point by a stress tensor, indicating the amount/directions of stretch/squeeze and torque/twist at every point in the material (determining how it will deform or break under load). Your 2D/3D software figures out what will happen by calculating how this tensor stress is distributed through the material as a function of external forces.

But isn't this a little like saying one had better understand how the ECM in your Toyota works before taking to a California Freeway? Besides, the real work of that endeavor is accomplished mostly by the Fuzzy Mathbox in the upstairs compartment of biomachine in the driver's seat, and pretty much NOBODY understands completely how that rather elegant piece of adaptive engineering works.

I'm not saying that it isn't a Good Thing to know exactly WHAT is under the Abstraction Layer and how it works, it's just that if the Abstraction Layer is well made and tested, it can be used very reliably and with confidence by people who are not the Alpha Toolmaker.

I've often thought that Math *and* Science were like Compilers or Interpreters for the physical world and that Math would have been a lot MORE grokkable and useful if it were taught and looked at as an exercise in Toolmaking. Because really, isn't it often a tool for making better tools for making better things?

At some point in the chain, most of us have to learn to trust that we're using the best Abstration Layers we can find in our work of accomplishing the daily tasks on which our lives depend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love mathematics. It is more intuitive. You are able to appreciate every aspect of life once you are able to put it into an equation. Everything in life is mathematics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK; my ideas of "real world applications" might be a bit skewed as an experimental physicist, but here goes...

- understanding correlation and covariance matrices are fundamental to fitting real-world multidimensional datasets (and understanding what the results mean); you can't properly interpret any statistical analysis without matrices

- anything in engineering requiring consideration in three dimensions, such as stress/strain calculations

- most of quantum mechanics reduces from "massive confusingness" to "trivial tautologies" when you understand linear algebra

- all of signals processing (convolutions, FFTs, etc.)

- just like in one dimensions, nearly everything is approximately a parabola (think Taylor's Theorem), every problem in higher dimensions is approximately a quadratic equation with matrix instead of scalar terms

If you're just balancing a checkbook, then matrices aren't any more useful than integrals of trigonometric functions. But for anything in a science/engineering/data-analysis field, I think understanding linear algebra is much more important than facility with calculus (beyond the basic conceptual level, and knowing how to plug harder calculus calculations into an appropriate computer program to do the hard parts).

Yes, the software had darn better be doing the matrix math for you, otherwise it can't handle concepts like stress which are fundamentally matrix quantities. This is why I consider linear algebra ("matrices") "underrated" --- because people don't learn about them earlier on, things that would be simple concepts are turned into "specialized equations" where you see some ugly, arcane formula without understanding the reasoning behind it.

For a practical example of the stress matrix, imagine holding (or, even better, actually hold) a block of some material in your hands. What kind of external forces can you apply to it? Well, you can stretch or squeeze in in any of the X, Y, or Z directions. You can also twist (torque) it in the XZ, YZ, or XY planes --- all of which introduce a particular form of stress on the material. To generally describe any kind of stress you can apply, any combination of squeeze/stretch and twist in any direction, you need a stress tensor, represented by a symmetric matrix with 6 independent elements (3 stretch/squeeze components, and 3 torque components). Any kind of force you apply to the outside of the material results in stress forces within the material that can be locally described at each point by a stress tensor, indicating the amount/directions of stretch/squeeze and torque/twist at every point in the material (determining how it will deform or break under load). Your 2D/3D software figures out what will happen by calculating how this tensor stress is distributed through the material as a function of external forces.

But isn't this a little like saying one had better understand how the ECM in your Toyota works before taking to a California Freeway? Besides, the real work of that endeavor is accomplished mostly by the Fuzzy Mathbox in the upstairs compartment of biomachine in the driver's seat, and pretty much NOBODY understands completely how that rather elegant piece of adaptive engineering works.

I'm not saying that it isn't a Good Thing™ to know exactly WHAT is under the Abstraction Layer and how it works, it's just that if the Abstraction Layer is well made and tested, it can be used very reliably and with confidence by people who are not the Alpha Toolmaker.

I've often thought that Math *and* Science were like Compilers or Interpreters for the physical world and that Math would have been a lot MORE grokkable and useful if it were taught and looked at as an exercise in Toolmaking. Because really, isn't it often a tool for making better tools for making better things?

At some point in the chain, most of us have to learn to trust that we're using the best Abstration Layers we can find in our work of accomplishing the daily tasks on which our lives depend.

I like how a topic asking about why people hate mathematics gradually progressed toward a direct demonstration on why people hate mathematics -- by being confusing as fuck and giving me a headache.

Carry on, don't mind me

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, totally lost me as well. Though, I guess this is a good thread to read at 3am when I am trying to fall asleep now. :lol: Ok but seriously, I get why science and engineer majors need advanced math. It relates to their field. I do not get why a pre-school teacher needs to do calc and advanced algebra. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kitty Spoon Train

Yeah, as others have said, most of what I didn't like about it (in school) was related to the way it tends to be taught....

Just. So. Dang. Dry.

When mathematics was used in other subjects (chemistry, physics, computer science, etc), I actually found it interesting and challenging, but maths for the sake of maths always felt like an incredibly dry and contrived subject to me. Which is odd in a way - because I'm otherwise a champion at rambling on and on about completely abstract things that have absolutely nothing to do with real life for most people. But there's usually some direct application to them, somewhere, at any rate. :lol:

I don't know if there is a good solution to this. The more I think about it, there's just so much to learn in mathematics to build a decent foundation of knowledge (until you get to the really interesting higher stuff in senior high school and college), that it's probably impossible to keep it all very real-life-applicable and interesting at every step of the way. *shrug*

Link to post
Share on other sites

....AVEN doesn't seem to like more than two videos in a post, so here's more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
trumpetchick

I hate it because I suck at it and because it seems more of a black and white thing to me. English seems to be more of a gray area and I just enjoy it more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love math. I get so excited when I see long equations. It's probably because how smart I feel when I figure them out, especially when you're the first person in your class to do so.

The one subject in math that I hate is geometry. I don't do well with shapes and all these lines confuse me. Quite a few frustrated tears have been shed over relationships between angles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
trumpetchick

I love math. I get so excited when I see long equations. It's probably because how smart I feel when I figure them out, especially when you're the first person in your class to do so.

The one subject in math that I hate is geometry. I don't do well with shapes and all these lines confuse me. Quite a few frustrated tears have been shed over relationships between angles.

For whatever reason, I did better in the geometry portion of the ACT than I did with algebra, even though my algebra grades have been higher than those for geometry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a shockingly low grasp of even basic maths. I am absolutely terrible, embarrassingly so, and I just cannot wrap my head around it in anyway. It baffles me to the point of pain and frustration. I have more chance of becoming prime minister of England than I would do of passing my GCSE maths exam which I failed so utterly and miserably when I was 15. I panic and my brain shuts down. And that is it. I don't hate it, rather I fear it.

I can't swim. But I do understand the principles of swimming, how you stay afloat, cut through the water and achieve the process of swimming. I envy people who can swim, it must be nice. However, I do not understand how someone can be so great at something so mind bogglingly confusing. Does my brain not work properly, do I panic and fog over or do I just have an inability to comprehend something a little more taxing than chucking your arms about in water? How do people juggle numbers in various ways, using different methods and do it with ease?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to love maths until calcalus.

It started out as pure sexy logic and then started skipping steps that was too complicated to prove so that put it down for me. I am not done with my bachelor yet so I might fall in love with her again. Engineering is hard.

edit: if you want to understand it go to khan acadamy and he will guide you through... I rarely hate something I know and understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Janus the Fox
Ive always had profound issues with maths, often the symbols, structure and its methods, coupled with issues with swapping numbers, keeping track of all things and difficulties with algebra made math a nightmare at every level. Though I like math in general, have preference with stats, graphs and its application with software, it was not an easy ride and it stands as the hardest subject to comprehend. I studied and passed Computational Mathematics at my degree comfortably otherwise. Thank goodness for Excel spreadsheets. ;)
Link to post
Share on other sites
Squirrel Combat

The teachers I had just made it not fun whatsoever! I thought geometry would be fun because I excel at shapes but that teacher was the worst of them all so I came to loathe that, too. Plus, higher math is so academic, you just can't apply it to the real world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Calligraphette_Coe

OK; my ideas of "real world applications" might be a bit skewed as an experimental physicist, but here goes...

- understanding correlation and covariance matrices are fundamental to fitting real-world multidimensional datasets (and understanding what the results mean); you can't properly interpret any statistical analysis without matrices

- anything in engineering requiring consideration in three dimensions, such as stress/strain calculations

- most of quantum mechanics reduces from "massive confusingness" to "trivial tautologies" when you understand linear algebra

- all of signals processing (convolutions, FFTs, etc.)

- just like in one dimensions, nearly everything is approximately a parabola (think Taylor's Theorem), every problem in higher dimensions is approximately a quadratic equation with matrix instead of scalar terms

If you're just balancing a checkbook, then matrices aren't any more useful than integrals of trigonometric functions. But for anything in a science/engineering/data-analysis field, I think understanding linear algebra is much more important than facility with calculus (beyond the basic conceptual level, and knowing how to plug harder calculus calculations into an appropriate computer program to do the hard parts).

Yes, the software had darn better be doing the matrix math for you, otherwise it can't handle concepts like stress which are fundamentally matrix quantities. This is why I consider linear algebra ("matrices") "underrated" --- because people don't learn about them earlier on, things that would be simple concepts are turned into "specialized equations" where you see some ugly, arcane formula without understanding the reasoning behind it.

For a practical example of the stress matrix, imagine holding (or, even better, actually hold) a block of some material in your hands. What kind of external forces can you apply to it? Well, you can stretch or squeeze in in any of the X, Y, or Z directions. You can also twist (torque) it in the XZ, YZ, or XY planes --- all of which introduce a particular form of stress on the material. To generally describe any kind of stress you can apply, any combination of squeeze/stretch and twist in any direction, you need a stress tensor, represented by a symmetric matrix with 6 independent elements (3 stretch/squeeze components, and 3 torque components). Any kind of force you apply to the outside of the material results in stress forces within the material that can be locally described at each point by a stress tensor, indicating the amount/directions of stretch/squeeze and torque/twist at every point in the material (determining how it will deform or break under load). Your 2D/3D software figures out what will happen by calculating how this tensor stress is distributed through the material as a function of external forces.

But isn't this a little like saying one had better understand how the ECM in your Toyota works before taking to a California Freeway? Besides, the real work of that endeavor is accomplished mostly by the Fuzzy Mathbox in the upstairs compartment of biomachine in the driver's seat, and pretty much NOBODY understands completely how that rather elegant piece of adaptive engineering works.

I'm not saying that it isn't a Good Thing™ to know exactly WHAT is under the Abstraction Layer and how it works, it's just that if the Abstraction Layer is well made and tested, it can be used very reliably and with confidence by people who are not the Alpha Toolmaker.

I've often thought that Math *and* Science were like Compilers or Interpreters for the physical world and that Math would have been a lot MORE grokkable and useful if it were taught and looked at as an exercise in Toolmaking. Because really, isn't it often a tool for making better tools for making better things?

At some point in the chain, most of us have to learn to trust that we're using the best Abstration Layers we can find in our work of accomplishing the daily tasks on which our lives depend.

I like how a topic asking about why people hate mathematics gradually progressed toward a direct demonstration on why people hate mathematics -- by being confusing as fuck and giving me a headache.

Carry on, don't mind me

Mea culpa. I seem to always be unintentionally confusing people, right down to my gender. I dunno, I'm weird like that, such as seeing Euler's Idenity equation for the first time almost giving me a religious experience. So I guess I tend to gush in language that people find confusing. I was really just trying to help and maybe strike up a conversation.

Sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But isn't this a little like saying one had better understand how the ECM in your Toyota works before taking to a California Freeway? Besides, the real work of that endeavor is accomplished mostly by the Fuzzy Mathbox in the upstairs compartment of biomachine in the driver's seat, and pretty much NOBODY understands completely how that rather elegant piece of adaptive engineering works.

If you're just driving your Totyota down the freeway, then you can probably get away with not knowing how the ECM works (or even that it exists). However, if you're a mechanic who services Toyotas, or an automotive engineer who designs Toyotas, you might want to understand more about the ECM system than "magic box that makes the engine run smoothly when you type in the correct numbers."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazel lights

I suppose I like math. The last math course I completed was an honors algebra 2 class and I'll be moving on to honors precalulus next year. Once I understand the math rules behind a problem it seldom seems hard. If I get a math problem wrong it'll be because of a simple mistake. I dislike graphing especially when forced to do Italy times after I already get the idea of how to make the graph, I prefer equations. I hate how the wide spread thought is that if you're not going into some sort of science or math career that higher level math is useless to learn. Math teaches you how to think in a certain way and it's like a workout for your brain. Higher level math is beneficial to everyone. Despite being at an upper level algebra class I'm still waiting for a math class that feels advanced. So far it's all very straightforward once you've learned all the rules. Admittedly though sometimes I'll do math and I'll think of math as beautiful but more often than that it'll feel tedious. Most of the time I'll feel indifferent when I'm doing math.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate equations. I got a nasty look from the teacher when I circled x, drew an arrow pointing to it and wrote, here it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mea culpa. I seem to always be unintentionally confusing people, right down to my gender. I dunno, I'm weird like that, such as seeing Euler's Idenity equation for the first time almost giving me a religious experience. So I guess I tend to gush in language that people find confusing. I was really just trying to help and maybe strike up a conversation.

Sorry.

Don't worry about it, there was a tinge of facetiousness to my post (it's part of my style)

I just thought it was amusing how a topic asking why mathematics is hated apparently brings out the mathematicians. XD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Responding to the original post:

I don't like math because I don't understand it nor do I see much 'real life' application in my personal life. I understand a lot of careers will rely on high level math, but I have never personally encountered a situation in my every day life that couldn't be solved by 8th grade math. The most mathy I get is figuring out a price of something when it is 30% off or something. I tease my mother saying she can never die because we tease her as the family financial adviser since she has made her career in banking. I also admit that I rely too much on my mother when it comes to financial decisions - while we didn't go through her bank to get our mortgage she helped us with every single step. I will call her if I have a credit/loan question as well.

If I cannot touch it or see it then it is basically worthless to me. I don't see this really as a bad thing - no single person can be good at everything. I can read a map very well while my mother would be lost in five minutes...but then again she can finance the car that would get us lost =P We each have our own skill sets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...