Difference between revisions of "Thinking Mathematics"
(Created page with "is there a Thinking Economics? basically a Thinking Physics for econ. actually, is there a Thinking Mathematics? (maybe AOPS books are it?) it feels like math would w...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
is there a [[Thinking Economics]]? basically a [[Thinking Physics]] for econ. | is there a [[Thinking Economics]]? basically a [[Thinking Physics]] for econ. | ||
| − | actually, is there a Thinking Mathematics? (maybe AOPS books are it?) it feels like math would work less well for some reason, but i am having trouble articulating why. maybe because you need to introduce a lot of terminology and concepts into someone's ontology first before you can even ask the question? probability/combinatorics is like one of the few branches where you don't need to do this (and this might be why the AoPS book is so enjoyable). | + | actually, is there a Thinking Mathematics? (maybe AOPS books are it?) it feels like math would work less well for some reason, but i am having trouble articulating why. maybe because [[Tinkering in math requires loading the situation into working memory|you need to introduce a lot of terminology and concepts into someone's ontology first before you can even ask the question]]? probability/combinatorics is like one of the few branches where you don't need to do this (and this might be why the AoPS book is so enjoyable). |
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Revision as of 20:11, 13 April 2021
is there a Thinking Economics? basically a Thinking Physics for econ.
actually, is there a Thinking Mathematics? (maybe AOPS books are it?) it feels like math would work less well for some reason, but i am having trouble articulating why. maybe because you need to introduce a lot of terminology and concepts into someone's ontology first before you can even ask the question? probability/combinatorics is like one of the few branches where you don't need to do this (and this might be why the AoPS book is so enjoyable).
