Calculus a bore

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

harmony14

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
212
Reaction score
268
I don't why but the thought of working on calculus just really demotivates. I go to class only to browse my fun and that's really boring for me. calculus, maybe because it took it in high school, just doesn't seem fun anymore. however, in physics class when using calculus it is quite exciting. do you guys also feel the same that unless you are learning applied calculus, you lack interest in the subject? I am taking physics 2 next semester and I read somewhere that most people regret not taking calculus 3 even though it's not required. what do you guys think? depending on your responses I'll probably have to learn calc 3 over winter break.

p.s. don't worry guys, i can learn calc its just the thought of doing it is boring.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I agree its a lot more fun when you apply it to real world circumstances such as with physics. There's nothing more exhilarating than creating your own equation from scratch based off of 3 or 4 different equations that have all the variables from a physics problem.

I personally loved calculus and it helped me get out of a depression due to family problems I had in highschool. I don't know, I would find doing several problems and finally *getting it* soothing. Perhaps this was because I dated a math geek back then, or perhaps it was due to my phenomenal calc teacher but one thing I do know is I did well partially because of YouTube videos that used mathematical applications to the real world. You should check out the 'Numberphile' youtube channel. I used to watch their videos religiously during calculus I and II even if it loosely connected back to the work I was doing. I was so in love with mathematical sequences from these videos that I got a perfect score on my Taylor Series exam!

Edit: As for physics 2 you really don't need calculus 3 unless your professor works in gradients instead of derivatives. Look into this in advance before you sign up for it, however, based off of my experience, all I needed was my base knowledge with derivatives and integrals to do exam questions.
 
Physics AND Calc are boring boring boring in my opinion... Now Chem, thats what its all about! :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Physics AND Calc are boring boring boring in my opinion... Now Chem, thats what its all about! :p[/QUOTeeAgrre


Agreed. I do best in classes that don't require a lot of memorization. Gen Chem 1 and 2 were all about electrons, periodic table and application of equations. Good times.
 
Agreed. I do best in classes that don't require a lot of memorization. Gen Chem 1 and 2 were all about electrons, periodic table and application of equations. Good times.
I'm not sure where you took calculus and physics but our programs require divergent rather than convergent thinking. We start with a word problem and have to construct answers by deriving equations based on the few equations we have memorized.

These 'memorized' equations are so useless to actual exam taking that during physics we were allowed formula sheets.

Sorry for getting so defensive btw haha :p I just really hate chemistry. I've always done better in chemistry however I hate it because it's all memorization in my eyes.
 
Nobody but the math geniuses just go and learn multivariable calculus over winter break. Unless you don't plan on doing anything else during your winter break. Calculus is interesting but only in the context of applications. Newton invented calculus so that he could do physics. You just have to remember why you're learning it when being taught by mathematicians who care more about pure math than applied math.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Newton invented calculus so that he could do physics.

newton_and_leibniz.png


I don't why but the thought of working on calculus just really demotivates. I go to class only to browse my fun and that's really boring for me. calculus, maybe because it took it in high school, just doesn't seem fun anymore. however, in physics class when using calculus it is quite exciting. do you guys also feel the same that unless you are learning applied calculus, you lack interest in the subject? I am taking physics 2 next semester and I read somewhere that most people regret not taking calculus 3 even though it's not required. what do you guys think? depending on your responses I'll probably have to learn calc 3 over winter break.

p.s. don't worry guys, i can learn calc its just the thought of doing it is boring.

20130120.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Physics AND Calc are boring boring boring in my opinion... Now Chem, thats what its all about! :p

I dont agree that Physics and Calc are boring. But I DO agree that Chem is what it's all about!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'm not sure where you took calculus and physics but our programs require divergent rather than convergent thinking. We start with a word problem and have to construct answers by deriving equations based on the few equations we have memorized.

These 'memorized' equations are so useless to actual exam taking that during physics we were allowed formula sheets.

Sorry for getting so defensive btw haha :p I just really hate chemistry. I've always done better in chemistry however I hate it because it's all memorization in my eyes.


?! Chemistry aint memorization!! You need to know what you are doing!!
 
I'm not sure where you took calculus and physics but our programs require divergent rather than convergent thinking. We start with a word problem and have to construct answers by deriving equations based on the few equations we have memorized.

These 'memorized' equations are so useless to actual exam taking that during physics we were allowed formula sheets.

Sorry for getting so defensive btw haha :p I just really hate chemistry. I've always done better in chemistry however I hate it because it's all memorization in my eyes.


Physics and Calc are not very abstract. They're much less abstract and therefore are easier to kind of work and find a way through the problem. Chemistry, if you try to memorize or try repetition, you're fuc*ed
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Physics and Calc are not very abstract. They're much less abstract and therefore are easier to kind of work and find a way through the problem. Chemistry, if you try to memorize or try repetition, you're fuc*ed
What chemistry are you talking about? x_x I'm currently in Ochem 1 and I'm not seeing what abstract thinking you're talking about.

We're just finished up organometallic additions and let me tell you- all we are doing is memorizing the catalysts and reagents needed and figuring out what types of products can form. Suuuure on an exam you can see a complicated product that requires several different mechanisms but by working backwards and memorizing what types of product each mechanism forms then its basically just fully memorization.

Okay, I'll give it to you that's a bit abstract but nothing like creating your own equation like in physics!!
 
haha, i'm not really a math whiz like aldol mentioned so some of the numberphiles think will go over my head. i had actually tried watching some of their vids, especially why the sum of all numbers -1/12 (teacher talking about it which piqued my interest). however i can watch physics video and understand where they are coming from (given i have the sufficient background). @aldol by learn calc 3 over winter break, i mean like just generally learn what symbols would mean and how to do their calculations to save some time and stress during the actual school year. at the moment, i am happy i had a good enough background in calc 1 and 2 so that i can focus on the physics without worry how to do the antiderivative of a work function.

P.S chemistry is my all time fave, at least the qualitative portion and understanding why it works and doesn't work. almost end of orgo 1st semester and i keep asking why that interaction happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
What chemistry are you talking about? x_x I'm currently in Ochem 1 and I'm not seeing what abstract thinking you're talking about.

We're just finished up organometallic additions and let me tell you- all we are doing is memorizing the catalysts and reagents needed and figuring out what types of products can form. Suuuure on an exam you can see a complicated product that requires several different mechanisms but by working backwards and memorizing what types of product each mechanism forms then its basically just fully memorization.

Okay, I'll give it to you that's a bit abstract but nothing like creating your own equation like in physics!!

Well, you can't just count O Chem I. Memorizing all of those mechanisms would all go to waste, if you change one simple reagent. A Dash/wedge bond could change, etc. You have to be able to think your way around it. Physics is much less abstract in the sense that it is easier to see what is happening than for Chemistry. Memorizing one mechanism and one reagent, is very different when thinking about the subject as a whole. In general Orgo itself, sure if you memorize you can memorize some mechanisms, but everything can always change. Changing one reagent, one structure, hell change the way you present a structure to someone, then EVERYTHING changes accordingly and will lead to something else being produced.

Physics and Calc are less abstract and if you are able to view the problem and derive your own equation from it, well it really is deriving it from past equations. Equations that are directly GIVEN to you. You are deriving from past things and using them to solve a word problem, which you can probably easily imagine. With Chem, it is different than memorizing ONE reaction... You have to UNDERSTAND the concept. Memorizing in Chem won't get you far...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
I mean you gotta understand for physics and Calc too. You can't memorize with those. But physics can be a lot easier for people than Chem.
 
Going to focus more on your thoughts on the class...So much of it comes down to perspective.

You could appreciate the fact that you know the material and try to enjoy a nice refresher, maybe pulling out your phone from to time to time.

Get used to getting through moments of boredom. When you hit biochem or upper levels chances are you'll go into a topic in-depth for a week that you have little interest in, like for me fatty acid oxidation/synthesis or the physiology of hearing, and you'll have to get through it regardless - go in with the right attitude
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
There's no such thing as being "finished with Chemistry" :D :D :D

Also, don't you still have to take Orgo II and Orgo Lab!?
I'm currently in o chem lab. Also as a poster may have mentioned in this thread or a previous I'm in one of those universities that are truncating chem requirements for med school into 3 semesters.
 
Newton invented calculus so that he could do physics.

Not quite. Newton is given the credit for inventing calculus in the same way that Einstein is given the credit for inventing relativistic thought, even though he piggy backed on Lorentz (not downplaying the leap in logic that Einstein took and the work he did--just trying to show that he stood on the shoulders of those who came before him). Much as calculus can be defined as a description of how things change, the calculus itself is something that changed over time.

Going all the way back to the ancient Greek mathematicians, we have Eudoxus and Archimedes using the method of exhaustion to approximate limits and integrals, with the latter using the method to calculate the area of a circle. But if we want to talk about Newton and what he is given credit for, there are a few heavy hitters we need to talk about first.

Galileo (and his contemporaries) performed experiments and thought experiments in which they discovered that the acceleration of a body due to gravity is invariant. This is where the second law of motion came from, which was already well known to Newton--it was a given used by many. His leap was in applying it to inverse square motion, though even then it's likely that he got the inverse square law from Hooke and took off from that perch to apply it to the cosmos.

As far as what we think of when we think of calculus, the credit again does not really go to Newton. If anything, the credit should go to his advisor, Isaac Barrow, who provided the first proof for the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. He too built on those who came before him, though. What Newton really did was see how derivatives and integrals can be used under one big umbrella.

So, Newton didn't really invent calculus. He gobbled together a lot of things that other people did, then applied them with a slightly different bent. His major contributions were in the inverse square motion (from which he explained tidal friction, precession, how gravity decreases with altitude, etc.), the third law of motion (which implies conservation of momentum and angular momentum), and his ingenious techniques for solving really difficult problems.

But we give Newton credit for inventing calculus and the laws of motion because he is an extremely important figure in physics, and it is easier to just give him credit for things he described while describing the stuff he actually did invent, even if most of them were well known at the time and not novel.

And by the way, the notation we use in calculus today came from Liebniz.
 
i had actually tried watching some of their vids, especially why the sum of all numbers -1/12 (teacher talking about it which piqued my interest).

There are numerous videos on youtube which abuse mathematics notation in a way to say something cute. This is common among physicists who purposely misapply mathematics in order to solve difficult problems (which is totally fine, but when they say things like 1+2+4+8+16+... = -1, I get annoyed). Those kinds of things are what happens when you use methods to assign values to divergent series. You totally can, but the key thing to remember is that -1/12 is not the limit of 1+2+3+4+..., it is simply the value assigned when you perform some mathematical techniques. In this case, you are applying the Riemann Zeta Function, which is an analytic continuation of the series. This takes the form of an infinite sum of n^(-s), which converges only when the real part of s is strictly larger than 1.

The Zeta function that you're describing is for Z(-1), which diverges; however, you can still perform the analytic continuation of the series, which will produce a value. When they say that 1+2+3+4+... = -1/12, they are forgetting that very important fact. The infinite sum 1+2+3+4+... does not converge and has no limit, as it tends to infinity.
 
I'm currently in o chem lab. Also as a poster may have mentioned in this thread or a previous I'm in one of those universities that are truncating chem requirements for med school into 3 semesters.
4 courses of Chemistry and lab in 3 semesters?
 
I don't why but the thought of working on calculus just really demotivates. I go to class only to browse my fun and that's really boring for me. calculus, maybe because it took it in high school, just doesn't seem fun anymore. however, in physics class when using calculus it is quite exciting. do you guys also feel the same that unless you are learning applied calculus, you lack interest in the subject? I am taking physics 2 next semester and I read somewhere that most people regret not taking calculus 3 even though it's not required. what do you guys think? depending on your responses I'll probably have to learn calc 3 over winter break.

p.s. don't worry guys, i can learn calc its just the thought of doing it is boring.

If you're not interested in calc, don't take calc 3. You don't need it. But it's not boring. It's the language of the universe. :)

Also, there isn't a ton of memorization required in math if you learn the relationships, concepts, and the language. You can derive a lot without having to memorize much.
 
4 courses of Chemistry and lab in 3 semesters?
Yes. My Uni isn't the only one doing it. Not sure why they decided to do it but I'm too far in to really back out now. Last year I went to an adcom for our state medical school and the guy told us they'd accept it (clearly, it's our state medical school), I also contacted adcoms from other unis and I was told it'd be accepted with a letter from the head of the department indicating what it is. This won't be a problem because by the time I apply next year our department would have already sent letters out notifying med schools. If individual med schools reject it, so be it. I can easily retake o chem 1 and 2.
 
If you're not interested in calc, don't take calc 3. You don't need it. But it's not boring. It's the language of the universe.

Also, there isn't a ton of memorization required in math if you learn the relationships, concepts, and the language. You can derive a lot without having to memorize much.

Yep don’t plan taking a class cause my lazy attitude is definitely going to win. I find it easier to derive physic equations however for both calc and physics I have to be exposed to the derivation.

P.s your series explanation for -1/12 went over my head but the conclusion I got was that conventional math wasn’t use?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Yep don’t plan taking a class cause my lazy attitude is definitely going to win. I find it easier to derive physic equations however for both calc and physics I have to be exposed to the derivation.

It's easier to derive things when you've seen it before. It's like trying to find a house you've been to before. You may not quite know where you're going, but it looks familiar. Deriving things from absolute scratch is hard. But I'm talking about deriving things not from scratch, but from basic concepts that don't really need to be memorized because they come naturally from first principles.

Edit: Like deriving the kinematic equations. You can do that even without calculus, and all you need to know is that distance is equal to the product of your average velocity and time, which is fairly obvious, and that acceleration is equal to the change in velocity over time, which is again, fairly obvious. All you need is some algebra (or if you want to do it quicker, some calculus), and you have all the kinematic equations for translational motion.

P.s your series explanation for -1/12 went over my head but the conclusion I got was that conventional math wasn’t use?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The point is that the infinite sum of natural numbers does not equal -1/12. The value -1/12 is the value assigned to the series when you use analytic continuation. The sum of natural numbers is a divergent series, meaning it doesn't sum to any number. Sometimes physicists use these things like the Riemann Zeta Function to find values for divergent series because it helps them solve physical problems (like in string theory). They then forget to say that the "=" doesn't really mean "=" in that case, but something else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
P.s your series explanation for -1/12 went over my head but the conclusion I got was that conventional math wasn’t use?
The point is that the infinite sum of natural numbers does not equal -1/12. The value -1/12 is the value assigned to the series when you use analytic continuation. The sum of natural numbers is a divergent series, meaning it doesn't sum to any number. Sometimes physicists use these things like the Riemann Zeta Function to find values for divergent series because it helps them solve physical problems (like in string theory). They then forget to say that the "=" doesn't really mean "=" in that case, but something else.

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top