ITT: Brainlet filters

ITT: Brainlet filters.

I liked linear algebra, but didn't like the classes themselves

I wrote a 100% spotless practical test, then almost failed the theoretical class.
Things you can do by matrix multiplication - fucking cool
Having to prove Cauchy inequality works over custom complex number groups (whatever they are called in english) is retarded
This is why I went into programming and not mathematics

All of organic chem.

All of physics beyond freshman general physics

I always hear about how hard statics and dynamics are so I guess those? But I didnt take them

Statics is often considered the easiest engineering course.

Dynamics is basically just more math-intensive freshman physics.

Topology

The math majors in my uni take intro to set theory during the first semester, and I have to say that it was a pretty good indicator of who has what it takes (at least for my class). People that didn't like/weren't good at set theory usually ended up moving to CS or something.

Lol

is this bait?

it's a common sentiment to like practical applications but not theorem proving

Whats the book user, or at least what would you recommend?

...

if you are already at the border between anal and calculus why not go all the way and get lay's or tao's analysis books?

Tao's analysis changed my approach to proof writing. Not sure why these memers refuse to hop off Spivak and Rudy

>ITT: Brainlet filters.
>first post's a description of a brainlet getting filtered
nice

second abstract algebra course, it's in the process of filtering me out right now

Yes, it's a great book, I did Tao until I finished the exercises, then the correspondent Rudin Chapter, then the youtube classes by that really smart asian guy and then Rudin again while solving the exercises, it was nice.

Pretty much. There are 3 tiers of introductory calculus at my uni. The top tier uses Spivak and if you fuck up you're allowed to drop down to one of the lower ones... forever dooming you to a life without high order math.

Which school, my school(UToronto) does the same

Turns out we go to the same school lol

oh lmao, what year you in?

3rd year, you in the specialist program? I fucked up and am in the math major.

This is accurate. I'm in Elem lin alg right now and I'm switching to become an Actuary.

3rd Math Major, CS Spec.
But I took 157,257 and 357

True, well I guess since you took 157 you can tailor the major to be good. I stupidly took 135/136 and now can't take the cool courses. I'll prolly go back and do it.

cute

that's what i ended up doing.
took 135/136 first year, 157 2nd and then got a waiver to do 257/357 at the same time.

Linear algebra will always be the king filter, complex analysis is a close runner up

When you say this are you talking about applied or theoretical?

Was a good call. I didn't realize the vast majority of courses that have 135/136 as a prereq would totally lack rigour. Even 300 level courses, ridiculous.

Yeah its pretty lame, honestly I wouldn't have even knew what I was missing if it wasn't for CSC165

>getting filtered by lin alg
Jesus, at least get filtered by anal like most people

Matrix calculations aren't cool at all

>Tfw too intelligent to take real analysis so I can't even get filtered out

Calculus. Not so much a filter course but it's name alone is the main reason people don't get into STEM. It has a reputation as being some exalted super complex kind of math despite being one of the most intuitive ones

>tfw currently getting filtered
Is pic related a good book? Am I retarded?

That book is fine.

I would say filter classes depend on the school and what type of filter.

Biology filter:
Genetics
Intro to Zoology

Chemistry:
Organic Chemistry
Quantitative Analysis
if biochem then
Biochemistry

Math:
I don't really know, all my math classes have been similar in overall difficulty for me. Maybe trig?

Those are the three areas I'm most familiar with.

I'm surprised that other people got tripped up with this like me. My program recommended 137 except as a result all my higher order math options were boring low level applied shit.

Stochastic signals

>random shit happens
>hurr durr

And how to deal with that random shit

stochastic fourier transform

But linear algebra is extremely intuitive. Especially how it is precented in Lay'.

have fun not understanding the stats you'll be using on a fundamental level

The purpose of a brainlet filter is to have a broad, easily accessible subject that, if someone is completely lost while trying to delve into it, they're probably a brainlet.

For example, if you can't get a good understandings of the contents of this book, you're guaranteed a brainlet.

Its a good book, but if you are in a proof based class in a good university, it wont suffice. It will still completely worth your time tho.

the high level stats courses you'll need are a lot harder than basic linear algebra just fyi

the last chapter on sets isn't that easy

How can you not have proof based classes in uni?

>Linear Algebra

I gave up on this before dropping out. Until further notice I am obliged to acknowledge brainlet status.

My class isn't basic lin alg. It's an accelerated lin alg course. I understand the fundamentals of linear algebra and their applications, but can't be bothered with proving all the meticulous bullshit.

I'm surprised too, what 3 people so far with the same problem in this thread alone? I think a big issue is the way math is taught in high school here, nobody except the elite minority know that math is about proofs coming into university.

If youre an engiecuck or chemlet.

Analysis of algorithms

His lectures are very good too.

>linear algebra 99% of the time taught poorly
>"haha, dumb brainlets get a grip!"
fag

Topics in K-theory

How the hell to do teach "wrong" linear algebra?

You can teach all math wrong if you don't explain it properly
I'd say nearly 90% of liberal arts majors just had shitty math teachers in grade school

Well yea, but linear algebra is just, well linear algebra. By uni all this shit should be pretty easy to grasp do, most of the complication being that it's tedious.

GR class was the filter that finally caught me, made it pretty far blending in with the smart guys

GR=?

Yeah, there's just not enough exposure until university, by which usually only people in math-y programs every find out. I had only vaguely heard of proofs and never tried one until first year

can the math or physics people recommend a good linear algebra text? I've taken the undergrad course before and I know the basics but I'd like a deeper understanding and intuition

general relativity

Hoffman & Kunze

Me too

Because Spivak turns you into a battle hardened proof marine.

Tao's work was peanuts compared to Spivak in terms of difficulty and the mathematical maturity it endowed me with.

no, it's bad user. very, very bad.

Go with Valenza's book

Valenza's

Exactly what my prof said. When he meets people and tells them he does math they go, "oooh math... I hate math lol, I was so bad at it in school". Then he tells them a simple proof about something cool like how there's different types of infinity and they usually understand and find it interesting. I think a lot of people have unrealized potential in math and just learned to hate it because it's taught via rote memorization.

Mechanics of Materials

>being a human calculator
>practical application

Pick one

>being this much of a brainlet
how do you have space in your head for thinking?

Actually (You) are the retarded

Kek

>Linear Algebra is useless to make muh webblogs & muh videogames.

The stereotype that CS programmers are brainlets who suck at Math is true.

Physics has this problem in my country. I went to one of the best math oriented high schools in the country and physics was still crap.

Projective geometry.

Only true answer

How is it a brainlet filter? It's the most intuitive shit I've ever studied and I learnt it from Friedberg's linear algebra, which is supposed to be hard.