Time for a poll

[chickenfeet]

I needed an excuse to use the user pic voted most popular by a random sample of sentient beings. I've also had some interesting on and off line convos and comments about math(s) recently so I thought what we really need is more ticky boxes. Lo, I bring you the great math(s) poll!

[Poll #826509]

Comments

[bopeepsheep.livejournal.com]

What about 'I married a mathematician so am not allowed to ignore it whether I'd like to or not'?

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure which is weirder; a mathematician or someone who would marry one.

[bopeepsheep.livejournal.com]

Ah, there may have been false pretences involved. I thought he was a CompSci, because of his D.Phil. The BA in Mathematics only sneaked into conversation later. ;-)

[melted-snowball.livejournal.com]

We often sneak that onto people. It's part of our charm.

[bopeepsheep.livejournal.com]

Strangeness and charm, even. :)

[melted-snowball.livejournal.com]

*chuckles*, though admits he knows not a thing about physics, due to being the son of a physicist.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

Does that make you completely spinorless?

[melted-snowball.livejournal.com]

To the point where I had to look up that word.

(I only ever took one course on rings/groups/fields, and never anything past the typical MIT mechanics and E+M courses that everyone has to take. I even took them in the more experiment-oriented flavour, because that was when I hoped that my undergrad education could teach me to like engineering. That failed.)

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

Spinor theory is somewhat off the mainstream of current mathematical research but I thought you might just have come across it as it's the field that Andrew Hodges works in.

[melted-snowball.livejournal.com]

Nope. After I read his book on Turing, I did spend some time looking at his website, but quickly realized that I was hurting as when I once tried to understand tensors. There really does seem to be a physics way of talking about math and a CS way of talking about math, and despite their both being really algebraic, I can't understand the physics one at all. And physicists who write in our journals drive me crazy.

[adjectivegail]

I'm afraid I don't really feel the poll sufficiently expresses my opinions/feelings/relationship with maths/etc, so I shall respond here instead :-)

I hated maths all the way through school until I was 13, at which point I was given a teacher who was actually able to explain the whys behind everything, at which point it made so much more sense and I really enjoyed it. In fact I did so well that they wanted to move me up a stream, however I categorically refused to move because I knew it was the teaching style that was making the difference. Hers was the only classroom with a number line stuck up on the wall above the board (-20 to +20 I think, but basically just something to give us an idea of 'which way to go'), and we got teased a lot about that but I didn't care because having it there meant I was actually able to work things out.

Our GCSE chemistry class also had quite a lot of maths in it, what with how many moles of atoms in the thingy and therefore how much does the other stuff weigh. I couldn't do it, and wound up insisting on taking the intermediate paper becuase I knew I could do the chemistry, just not the maths.

So I suppose that means "fear and loathe", but also "much beauty", but the most important would be "bloody difficult".

I did A-level Biology, Chemistry and Psychology, all of which required maths in some way or another. The Chem teacher managed to explain how to do molar calculations and all of a sudden it made sense. I was so relieved. The psychology coursework probably involved the most (and most complicated) maths, as we had to work out probabilities and significances and so forth. The maths itself wasn't hard but some of the concepts behind it was, and those were important because it would affect which significance test you used.

So, I did some maths work beyond GCSE, not enough to be considered a major component of the course (well, maybe the Chemistry), but enough to put some people off doing the courses because they knew it'd be the bane of their lives.

Ditto at university - regardless of how well we did in our modules and projects and so forth, if we didn't get respectable grades in the compulsory IT and maths stuff that we had to go through in tutorials, it was an automatic fail. That kind of maths was hard for many of us, because it required actual logical thinking (hah!). The most memorable one was the first question we got - something like 'if the nucleic acids weigh these different, and these are the proportions of them in a particular string of DNA, and you want liver cells, and there are this many liver cells in the average human, how many cadavers will you need to get this many repeats of this particular string of DNA which is so many thousand bases long?'

I spent more than two hours on that, with my lab partner, and then the postgrad took pity on us and walked us through it. My brain still hurts to think about it.

And yet, I took a job calculating all the changes in pay for all the staff at the previous Trust I worked for, including working out percentage increases and pro rata amounts for part time staff and so forth. And my current job requires me to do lots of counting and working out percentage coverages of vaccinations. And I've just been encouraged to bone up on my stats knowledge again.

So I'm still using maths. The kinds of maths I need for my job/previous jobs doesn't faze me. I don't come into work every day dreading having to do some more maths.

But I also don't have the appreciation of it that I wish I did, I am only able to glimpse fleetingly the beauty and logic of the more complex stuff. But at the same time I refuse to worry too much about it because otherwise I go cross-eyed for a while (e.g. when aegidian tried to explain the concept of imaginary numbers going off at 90^o to the 'regular' number line), and there are so many other ways of looking at life, the universe and everything.

So I would've answered 'no' to all of the options in the last question :-)

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

It's interesting to see how people answer these questions because different people have such a different perspective of what mathematics is. As best I can tell, everything you've described above (except maybe a bit of stats), I would regard as 'arithmetic' and therefore barely mathematics at all but your perspective would be, I suspect, much more 'normal' than mine. (see kalypso_v's comment. I did 'A' level chemistry (well four terms of it, I eventually dropped it to concentrate on a really nasty conditional offer from Cambridge) and I would have said that no maths was involved at all. But then I was doing double maths 'A' and 'S' levels.

One of the reasons I asked the questions that I did was a not very well formulated idea that there is a point at which 'real' maths kick in and at that point some people experience a kind of philosophical/aesthetic breakthrough but that others, equally able, don't. It's not easy to express. It gets a bit like trying to explain colour to a blind person.

[adjectivegail]

I agree with you about the arithmetic vs mathematics thing, just I am pretty much entirely ignorant of the latter so I tend to conflate the two.

I don't think I'm ever going to get to the 'real maths' point, and quite frankly I think I'm happier this way, but your comment here:
...there is a point at which 'real' maths kick in and at that point some people experience a kind of philosophical/aesthetic breakthrough but that others, equally able, don't.
reminded me of the shift between A-level biology and my Microbiology course at uni. There were certain things that we learned in A-level biology, patterns of growth and interactions between systems and things, which were then echoed in things I learned about on the microscopic scale. Patterns of growth and things that don't really apply when you're talking about one bacterium, but that suddenly appear when you've a whole colony of them, and symbiotic relationships between bacteria and their hosts, and so forth. (and of course I now have no examples for this because I've forgotten everything!)

I'm fairly sure that a mathematician could explain the maths behind all of that to me, but frankly I don't really care. It was beautiful and I was awed and loved the fact that I was able to study it.

(posted in a hurry coz I'm supposed to be working so apologies if it's incoherent!)

[badasstronaut.livejournal.com]

I have to qualify my responses here. I'm no mathematician. I don't understand much, although it was my favourite thing at primary school when I was little. But whether I understand or not, someone talking maths (or physics) at me is hott hott hott (if they can cope that I probably have no idea what they're talking about). One day I might meet the special person who can unlock the barriers in my head and let the essential maths juice flood in, and everything will fall into place, and there'll be world peace and flowers and ice cream for everyone.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

This is really interesting. See my reply to asrana in this thread. Your comment suggests the existence of people who intuit the wonder of mathematics without actually having the technical skills to go there. I would never have guessed that such people existed.

[badasstronaut.livejournal.com]

In some ways, it's a bit akin to magic (except with the advantage that sometimes it really works). When someone talks maths at me, sometimes I get a momentary little inkling of what they're on about, and it stretches my brain a bit letting some fireworks in, and that's a pretty powerful aphrodisiac. I do wonder, though, if I did have a better grasp of maths if that would kill the romance and mystery of it rather than enhance it. But that would be a one way path of discovery - no turning back.

[kalypso-v.livejournal.com]

One thing that exasperates me is the way the general public use "maths" as a synonym for "arithmetic". Because my job does require extensive use of arithmetic, so that confusion crops us a lot. (And yes, it's a branch of maths, but I would never describe what I do as maths.)

Typical conversation with my boss:
Him: "Can you check the maths for me?"
Me: "You mean the arithmetic."
Him: "If I wanted your help on English language and grammar I'd say so."

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I know exactly what you mean. See asrana's comment above.

[kalypso-v.livejournal.com]

The other thing that annoys me is the way people glory in their inability to do arithmetic or maths (of course, they generally say the latter and mean the former). I don't mean that they should be deeply embarrassed or ashamed, just that they should admit to their blind spot in a matter-of-fact way rather than indicating that it's a badge of pride (because understanding maths would be so uncool).

This carries over into radio programmes on the topic, which always seem to take the line "Ha, ha! Bet you really hated maths at school! He, he! But we're here to tell you lots of jokes so you'll realise it's jolly fun! Ho, ho, ho!" (At this point, I switch off, so I never find out whether they had something worthwhile to convey.) They never do this in programmes on science, where the presenters adopt a businesslike approach assuming an uninformed but intelligent listener.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

Grr, snarl, yes!

I've never met anyone who thought it was smart or a sign of a superior mind to be illiterate.

[thidwick.livejournal.com]

I have no idea what the US equivalent of an O-level in maths would be, so my checkbox there may be incorrect. I [barely] made it through trigonometry pre-calculus before I quit.

I was always quite interested in math, but it didn't come very easily to me, especially as we got farther and farther into more abstract concepts. And then I had an absolutely terrible math teacher for two years in high school. He was nearing retirement and had clearly lost interest in teaching. Rather than learning how to do math, we learned how to use our graphing calculators. I fell apart in his class. I really needed the sort of math teacher who would explain things out, step by step, in a way that a lot of my more mathematically-inclined peers probably would have found boring or slow or redundant. Switching teachers wasn't a possibility -- he was the only teacher who taught the levels of math I was in at the time (Algebra II, and then functions/statistics/trigonometry/pre-calc). I would have taken calculus my senior year (with a teacher who was widely regarded as wonderful), but at that point any interest in the subject had been beaten out of me, plus I really did not feel like I was prepared. I had passed my last year of math by the skin of my teeth -- and even that was due more to my comfort with my calculator. I certainly didn't actually understand much of anything!

Even if I'd had the Best Math Teacher Ever in high school, I still doubt I would have gone into a field that was math-heavy, and because my interests were elsewhere I probably wouldn't have pursued it any farther than I absolutely needed to. But still, I really regret that I didn't have that choice.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I have no idea what the US equivalent of an O-level in maths would be

There isn't one really I guess. That part of the question was aimed more at people in countries that have national exams at 16 and 18.

[lnr]

I loved maths all the way through school, it all just made sense, and my only bad point was occasionally not showing "enough" working because some steps were just so intuitively obvious for me I hadn't realised I needed to mention them. I always knew I wanted to go and study it at university, and it wasn't hard to get two A grades at A-level.

And then I went to university and eventually got a BA in Maths (yeah, Oxford's weird) but that was through 4 years of hell, failing finals first time round and passing them the second on the basis of 4/9 of the papers and a doctor's note. There was stuff in there I still loved and that made me think maths is just neat, but sitting finals papers without the foundations necessary to have a hope in hell of being able to answer the questions? Nightmare.

So now I run away from maths, it scares me because I know I should be able to do it and I hate the fact I can't any more. But just a bit of me still finds it really cool.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I have a BA in Maths too!

I noticed through my university career that many, many people hit the wall at different points. We lost a third of the honours class at the end of the first year (Durham was good about letting people transfer to other courses) and another chunk at the end of the second year. I also noticed that a goodly proportion of even the good mathematicians never got their heads around probability theory or any of its derivatives.

[lnr]

It was partly the wall, partly laziness, partly not being used to not having someone to actually push me, and partly life being shit and serious depression. And with the second year stuff not being examined until finals, but being necessary as a foundation to the third year, it's possible to get yourself in a right pickle.

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

many people hit the wall at different points

I managed to get a grade C at A-level, but really floundered at first year university accessory maths.

I'm in an odd category that doesn't really fit into your questionnaire, so I've had to fudge the answers there a bit. Basically I was OK at arithmetic at primary school, though was much better at English. But I really really couldn't do mental arithmetic, despite regular weekly tests. (Don't get me started on the "Kids these days can't do mental arithmetic. They should have regular tests for practice.") I could do what we called "problems" well though. I could work out what I needed to calculate, but usually made a mistake doing the calculation-- which is why I love spreadsheets!

In secondary school, we had a wonderful teacher. We had a maths club that I joined and I could see the fascination of the subject. I just couldn't do it! I was just about groping my way to some sort of understanding of one topic at the point where we were moving on to the next. Despite this, because I chose science A-levels, I took A-level maths. I obtained a grade E at first attempt, C after another year of studying, which was done mostly on my own because our Maths teacher had chosen the brand new maths-with-statistics option and Bury Tech, where I went to resit A-levels, was doing pure and applied maths. I opted to stick with stats, which I liked because I could see a purpose to it. Of course this was BC (Before Computers) or even calculators, so the syllabus will be quite different now.

Then, at university, I somehow scraped through the first year accessory course, but knew there was absolutely no way of going further.

However... I still find maths fascinating as a spectator sport. I've ended up married to a mathematician (A chartered mathematician, no less!) who, when I first met him, couldn't even rearrange equations and used to ask me to do it for him. G came to maths late, in his 30s, and did an OU degree, then a masters and now has almost finished a Ph.D. which is mostly maths, with computer modelling and hydrology and meteorology.

[kalypso-v.livejournal.com]

I went to university and eventually got a BA in Maths (yeah, Oxford's weird)

But a mathematician friend at Oxford assured me that, at degree level, mathematics is an art, not a science.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

At Oxford, even engineering is an art.

[lnr]

It's true that Maths is somewhere inbetween Arts and Science and is neither fish nor fowl, although you can choose options that tailor it closer to one or the other.

But *everything* at Oxford gets you a BA to start with. And in fact my degree is technically in "Mathematical sciences".

[a-d-medievalist.livejournal.com]

I'm in a quandary about maths. I've always been crap at them. Part of this was that, as a child I went from a school system where we were doing "new Math" (the 4th-grade book had sets on the cover, and we were taught all about sets and different mathematical properties ...) to a school system where we were expected to have learned all the traditional stuff. Part of it was that I spent most of the time I could get away with it in the back of the room reading while the teacher was talking (I failed math one half-term, because I'd not done any homework -- I still passed all the tests). But I think most of it was that no one ever explained things to me in a way that I understood the point OR what I was trying to do. I found geometry easier than algebra, because I could 'see' it -- and even then, I had problems with the formulae.

Oddly, when I was in grad school, I realized one day (when waitressing and dividing a very complex multi-party check) that I was actually doing algebra. I re-learned a lot of basic arithmetic then as well-- weighing grades means arithmetic! And when the kid had algebra, and needed help with her homework, the first year or so made lots of sense to me, although her teacher and I differed on the best way to do things (I took out steps). SO ... long story, I know --- I now really wish I'd done mote maths, with good teachers, because they make much more sense to me now.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I guess I was pretty lucky with teachers though to be honest, beyond learning to read and write, I'm not convinced I learned anything much at elementary school. I can certainly remember quite precisely the point at which I grasped that there was something more to mathematics than puzzle solving (though I was damn good at that - I scored 100% on both the Common Entrance maths papers). It would have been in my first year in the Upper School (ie I'd just turned 13). I got my hands on a copy of Edwin Abbott's Flatland and I was hooked. I wonder how many budding mathematicians have been similarly snared by that slim but venerable volume.

[knirirr.livejournal.com]

Answers:

1. I wish I could understand it, but I'm too thick.
   
2. Barely passed A-level.
   
3. I wish I could understand it, but I'm too thick or a pox on statistics, it's some sort of voodoo.
   

[liv]

Definitely numerate, enough to assume you mean mathematics rather than arithmetic, enough to be able to follow mathematical arguments in scientific contexts. But by the standards of mathematicians I'm clearly not one. If you prefer it in terms of qualifications, I took the double A Level and 4 terms' worth of "maths for chemists" at uni. (Biologists with double A Level took chemists' maths, chemists with double A level took physicists' maths...) I expect it's about equivalent to the first 2 weeks of an actual maths degree, though, so I can't exactly call it a degree with significant maths.

I like maths, but on the same level I find lots of other topics interesting to read about. I'm not passionate about it, and I'm glad I realized this before I embarked on a maths degree. The thing is, you need to know quite a lot of maths to even be interested in the latest developments, and I do have at least that much background.

[sabotabby]

I'm not sure what the equivalents of A- or O-level are in Canada, but you're required to take high school math up until tenth grade. I did it up to OAC (grade 13) even though it was among my weakest subjects, mostly because I didn't want to be one of those Girls Who Are No Good At Math. I worked insanely hard and did respectably. The only math class in which I did wonderfully was a trial class on fractals and chaos theory.

[rhythmaning.livejournal.com]

I'm more interested in theoretical physics - small and large scales (particles and cosmology) - than mathematics. I nearly did A level maths, having been top of the class at O level, but I wanted to do biology, physics and chemistry - and I didn't want to do four A levels.

I do think there is a lot of beauty in numbers.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

These days it's pretty hard to find the line between theoretical physics and applied mathematics. Time was when one could relatively easily apply physical tests to theories to see whether they were promising or not. That's really no longer the case. Most of the current cutting edge theories deal with energy levels that are never going to be experimentally achievable so the only bases for deciding whether a theory has merit or not are either popularity (which is fraught of course as Kuhn and others have pointed out) or some, essentially, aesthetic judgement. Of course this doesn't bother 99% of the rampaging herd of string theorists, whether they consider themselves mathematicians or physicists, because the prevailing zeitgeist basically eschews any serious discussion of truth in the ontological sense.

[minx-minx.livejournal.com]

My answers to question one depend upon my frame of mind on any given day.

[lemur-man.livejournal.com]

I really didn't get on well with it for the most part, perhaps because many things never really seemed to be explained properly in terms of their reason for being or their usefulness. There seemed to be a lot of 'stop asking questions and memorize this formula' going on. The only parts that I genuinely liked and understood were statistics and some geometry, which, oddly enough, seemed to stump some of the other students who excelled at things like calculus.

I realize that for some people, maths is an awesome, inspiring subject and I'm not trying to flaunt my innumeracy here, but I don't get excited about it (I did read the New Yorker piece about Perelman recently, with interest). People who are really into maths, however, often don't seem to realize that other people's strengths and talents can lie elsewhere, as beautiful and meaningful as maths may seem to them. I'm more of a words person, and maths fans can often be poor communicators.