Keep in mind that I have not took an analysis course.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-30 21:52 ID:ts/QrQTy
Because most people are going into engineering or accounting or some other bullshit field, and they need analysis about as much as they need underwater basket weaving.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-30 21:57 ID:m1IVlu8D
>>2
OK NOW YOU'VE GONE AND ANGERED THE PURE MATHEMATICIAN
fuck analysis, I got a degree decades ago and never heard of it, and you dicks can't stop talking about it. It sounds horrible, not to mention badly named because it is vague.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-30 23:31 ID:AHMuwiOA
>>4
a degree in what? because it obviously wasn't math.
My current Calc III professor likes to show the proof of the next topic we're covering whenever we start a new chapter. About 25% of it goes right over my head. Most of the others in my class seem to understand about 10% of it.
It's great of her for at least making the effort to prove she isn't full of shit. But to be honest, she's kind of a mediocre teacher. It's about impossible to explain concepts as confusing as Calculus proofs in the span of a single class and still leave the majority of the time to really teaching the lesson.
>>11
Everyone else actually thinks it's so easy they just don't bother listening. You're just inferior.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 13:47 ID:sZj/hLih
>>11
The proofs are a major part of the lesson.
If all you have from a calculus class is a notion of how to formulaicly solve certain problems, you have barely learnt anything at all.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 14:04 ID:sjRFLyHK
>>13
Sure, understanding that the derivative is the slope which is the rate of change and that integrals are the area under the function, that's all fine and you need to understand that to understand calculus. But the epsilon-delta stuff, the calculus student needs as much as underwater basket weaving. Maybe if the professor wants to show how it's roughly derived, he could show how Newton derived it or something, without all the epsilon-delta stuff.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 14:49 ID:ux0m2hJz
>>14
epsilon-delta arguments aren't hard, they make sense, and are intuitive. you're just retarded.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 15:43 ID:rDL5BMwU
Because most types of analysis require A LOT of mathematical background. i.e. You really couldn't learn Fourier analysis if you didn't know how to manipulate converging infinite series.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 15:44 ID:U/TJ9wmT
>>13
If all you have from a calculus class is a notion of how to formulaicly solve certain problems, you are an engineer.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 16:02 ID:sjRFLyHK
>>15
I've taken an analysis course and I understand the concept thanks and shure it's intuitive and whatnot. But it's time wasted trying to explain the proofs to a calculus class when all they need to know is the Riemann sums concept which is pretty much the same thing anyway.
>>17
Ya okay. Let's say you were taught the whole rings and groups thing and the associated proofs when you were learning how to do arithmetic. That is just ridiculous. This is the same thing to a lesser extent.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-02 20:42 ID:suFRS45S
>>18
Pre-school math is mainly utilitarian, to be a tool to help you understand other things about the world around you, like money.
Calculus is a study of math itself, using math to understand more math. The two will necessarily be on entirely different levels.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-02 21:22 ID:aNhP6fks
>>19
Lol wat? We are talking about integrals and derivatives, right? We use them for physics, chemistry, and so many other things. Derivatives are the _rate of change_ of a function which is very much needed to understand the world around you.
I really don't see how you can put calculus in a special place where it is not utilitarian, just on a higher scale.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-03 1:49
>>20
Calculus the classes, not calculus the field of mathematics.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-03 1:49
>>20
Calculus the classes, not calculus the field of mathematics.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-03 14:41
>>21,22
Are you retarded or something? Calculus classes teach calculus. What the hell is so complicated about the concept of learning calculus in a calculus class?
>>23
Nothing, but 'learning calculus' consists of more than memoizing a few derivatives from a table. Namely, all the 'how does this work' stuff that we skip when we teach little children how to add and multiply.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-04 0:44
I looked up this so-called analysis. There's no such thing, because every definition I've seen just lists other topics. Just call it calculus. And so-called "reals analysis" is just a detail of number theory.
If you were to hand college freshmen a copy of baby Rudin, they would either 1) die or 2) persevere with an undying love of mathematics, abstraction and rigor. In either scenario, they would not graduate an engineer. The world needs engineers, calculus != analysis, QED
>>36
It's a folk etymologically defensible opinion.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-11 1:47
Calculus is simply one branch in the field of analysis. In a real analysis course, or in advanced calculus, you learn the proofs which shows why the methods, rules, and theorems in standard calculus I-III/IV courses that you take at the University on your 1st or 2nd year, are true.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-11 3:22
Because you won't understand the motivation behind analysis without an understanding of Calculus.
>>13
Most of computational calculus is finding clever algebra tricks to solve the problem in question.
>>16
You handwave the Fourier analysis. You can calculate all the coefficients without knowing anything about convergence. After that, you wave your hands and claim that the series converges. Same applies to Taylor series.
>>18
I actually think group theory is a great complement to arithmetic. Analysis however, is totally owning me... even though I'm studying with the book by Ross.
>>34
Almost, it is anal + lysis; when a cell lyses it does not get loosened, it explodes.
>>41 and everybody who says that calculus = analysis,
real analysis =/= complex analysis, and calculus is a subset of their unions.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-18 23:35
Ok, there is calculus, where you learn about derivatives, integrals, and infinite series. If you are lucky, you get into higher dimensions.
With real analysis, there are some delta-epsilon proofs and proving stuff like L'hopital's rule, which you just learned to use it. But of course that is just baby analysis.
In analysis, you first learn about measures, like Lebesgue measure and lebesgue-stieltjes measures. Also integration theory. With this, you can integrate a much larger range of functions then the ones you see in calculus. Then you can get into functional analysis, but I haven't gotten that far, yet. I am more of an algebra person and topology person.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-19 9:33
Taking analysis without calculus is like repairing your car without knowing how to drive one.