| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
twright 
Chief Pilot
Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: London UK
Points: 3303
|
 Topic: A book recommendation for you mathematitian's!
Posted: 02 Nov 2008 at 6:05pm |
Hi guys!
Some of you may remember my post made a few weeks ago about A Level maths. After doing some research into flight training centres - in particular Oxford Aviation Academy - I found that the selection process, alongside an interview and various teambuilding activities involves a pretty hard mental arithmetic test that you have to be super quick and effecient at working out hard sums in your head. This, I feel, whilst an incredibly useful skill - particularly in the airline industry - is sadly mostly neglected by the national curriculum, and most students are taught to do long multiplication and division using a calculator - that's what the exams are based upon, so that's what they expect!
I am nutoriously bad at mental maths - if a calculator's not available, one sum can turn out to be hours of entertainment! Until I was recommended "The Trachtenberg System Of Basic Mathematics", and went out to Waterstones to go and buy it! After reading a chapter of the book, I now find myself being able to multiply six digit numbers by each other in seconds, without reaching for my trusty calculator!
You may think it sounds like a deathly boring read, but actually, far from it! It's set out in an easy to understand and straight to the point manner and it's highly addictive
to end up learning a new skill that can wow people! A recommended read!
There is also some computer software available which I downloaded the demo of, and despite their website saying it's amazing and has all sorts of benefits over the book - it's not worth $80. Buy the book for £6.99 - you won't be disappointed!
|
|
Kind regards,
Tom
|
 |
FSaddict
Chief Pilot
Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Points: 1067
|
Posted: 02 Nov 2008 at 9:54pm |
|
ooh! interesting!
|
|
twright
Chief Pilot
Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: London UK
Points: 3303
|
Posted: 02 Nov 2008 at 10:09pm |
 FSaddict wrote:
ooh! interesting! |
That sounds a little sarcastic... 
|
|
Kind regards,
Tom
|
|
theryanbradley
P1
Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: EGNM
Points: 950
|
Posted: 02 Nov 2008 at 10:33pm |
|
Might just have to purchase this one...
|
|
Many Thanks,
Ryan
There's a big difference between a pilot and an aviator. One is a technician, the other is an artist in love with flight.
|
|
MartinW
Moderator in Command
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 at 10:07am |
Maths! Shudder... I'm scared! 
|
|
Odai
Chief Pilot
Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Location: NW England
Points: 3731
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 at 11:39am |
Martin, it's unlikely you will find this hard. It just takes tons and tons of practice. This sort of stuff is NOT maths at all, it's numeracy. 
That's the reason it's neglected with respect to the a-level syllabus twright, it's simply not maths. It's just another skill that helps in doing maths, and is often confused with maths.
You can be a genuis mathematician but not be able to add up 2 numbers together, it's very common.  |
|
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
|
|
Magic Man
Chief Pilot
Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: South Wales
Points: 5336
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 at 1:20pm |
Odai wrote:
You can be a genuis mathematician but not be able to add up 2 numbers together, it's very common. |
I seriously doubt that is very common at all...
But this book does look interesting, teaches different methods to achieve the same result. If it helps people understand the basic principles better then it's a good thing...
|
|
ross1562
Chief Pilot
Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: Carterton, UK.
Points: 1011
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 at 1:31pm |
Im not being funny but that is the silliest comment i have heard for a long while Odai!! A GENIUS mathematician not being able to add up two numbers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Go on then Odai, whats the difference between numeracy and maths????
|
Ross1562(Air Observer)
FSX SP1 SP2.
DellE520, 8600GT, nHancer, 3GB Ram, Intell Duo Core
|
|
MartinW
Moderator in Command
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 at 2:38pm |
|
Chuckle!
|
|
Odai
Chief Pilot
Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Location: NW England
Points: 3731
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 at 6:25pm |
You all know I didn't mean it literally, but it's true many people are geniuses who can't work with numbers very well. I know someone who is dyslexic, they find numeracy very difficult, but they are awesome with maths.
I also am very slow when working with numbers, I get 25% extra time in exams, but I would still consider myself strong in maths.
You all have a warped image of what maths is planted in your heads. 
Numeracy is simply being able to manipulate numbers in very simple ways. Maths is totally different.
|
|
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
|
|
MartinW
Moderator in Command
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 at 6:50pm |
I do see where he's coming from. Higher mathematics is a whole different ball game to simple numeracy. That’s higher maths, not the stuff we did at school.
However, the statement that a genius mathematician might not be able to add two numbers together was a bit of a wild statement. If a metaphor, an over the top one.
It's also true that anyone progressing to advanced mathematics would have mastered simple numeracy long ago.
|
|
Odai
Chief Pilot
Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Location: NW England
Points: 3731
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 at 7:56pm |
|
You'd think so Martin, but it's simply not the case. Some people simply cannot manipulate numbers very well, but are extraordinary mathematical geniuses. There are many conditions which cause this (inc. dyslexia, dyscalculia, aspergers I think). Einstein was one of them (this is commonly misinterpreted as Einstein was bad at maths - a load of nonsense).
|
|
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
|
|
MartinW
Moderator in Command
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 at 8:48pm |
The notion that Einstein was a dyslexic has been disputed by many, including his biographers. There is no proof that this was the case.
The notion that Einstein was bad at math’s or even numeracy, is simply not true. He was less than a genius at such things compared to other physicists; in fact his wife helped him with complex equations. However, he was far, far, ahead of you and me, or indeed the average person in numeracy or math’s. He was only limited in relation to other world leading physicists. It’s this point that is frequently misinterpreted.
If you are a talented mathematician, you are far from incapable of adding two and two, or indeed far from being limited in this respect. Your capabilities in terms of numeracy may not be on a par with your piers, or indeed on a par with your capabilities in terms of the more advanced aspects of math’s, but nothing like the degree of incapability you describe.
You would hardly be studying advanced mathematics or even basic mathematics without first progressing thorough the basics of numeracy. The concept of leapfrogging the basics, straight to advanced mathematics’ is fantasy. No system of education works that way.
|
|
FSaddict
Chief Pilot
Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Points: 1067
|
Posted: 05 Nov 2008 at 1:22pm |
twright wrote:
FSaddict wrote:
ooh! interesting! |
That sounds a little sarcastic... |
Soz wasn't ment to be i actually need improvement on my mental maths 
P.S this topic needed a bump
|
|
Odai
Chief Pilot
Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Location: NW England
Points: 3731
|
Posted: 06 Nov 2008 at 10:16pm |
The notion that Einstein was a dyslexic has been disputed by many, including his biographers. There is no proof that this was the case.
The notion that Einstein was bad at math’s or even numeracy, is simply not true. He was less than a genius at such things compared to other physicists; in fact his wife helped him with complex equations. However, he was far, far, ahead of you and me, or indeed the average person in numeracy or math’s. He was only limited in relation to other world leading physicists. It’s this point that is frequently misinterpreted.
If you are a talented mathematician, you are far from incapable of adding two and two, or indeed far from being limited in this respect. Your capabilities in terms of numeracy may not be on a par with your piers, or indeed on a par with your capabilities in terms of the more advanced aspects of math’s, but nothing like the degree of incapability you describe.
You would hardly be studying advanced mathematics or even basic mathematics without first progressing thorough the basics of numeracy. The concept of leapfrogging the basics, straight to advanced mathematics’ is fantasy. No system of education works that way. |
It's strange how you argue with my on absolutely anything I say, even when you seem to have limited knowledge on it.
I don't know where you got the idea Einstein was not "as good as" other physicists with respect to his mathematical genius, but it's simply not true. I don't know how much of an idea you have on what theoretical physics is like, but it's almost all maths, end of. Maths at the higher levels is absolutely incredible, there are some very fascinating aspects to it. How well you do in theoretical physics (TP from now on please) depends almost totally on your mathematical ability, for a number of reasons. If Einstein was not as good as others, there is no way (and I mean, no way) he could have derived his special theory of relativity (and the rest). The idea his wife helped him (with spec.rel anyway) is absurd. Unless he produced the solutions himself, he wouldn't have a clue what he was doing. TP relies mostly on maths as I've said, unless you derive the equations yourself, you wouldn't have an idea of where you're going. Infact, a good example is string theory. That is 100% Maths. Literally. No physical interpretation (not like other examples anyway), just maths. It's very hard to explain, I also don't know how far you've taken maths before, so I'm not sure how you'll understand what I'm saying.
The maths in TP is not simply a way of manipulating numbers to get an answer, it's a very different situation.
As for your ideas on numeracy, you still seem not to have grasped something. Numeracy is not maths at all. It's not a basic level of maths. It's just not maths. That's why when you did numeracy as a young child (if you can remember that far back  ), they called it numeracy, not maths. Numeracy is simply a key skill that can be useful to you in relation to how fast you can do maths, that's it. Technically, it's possible for someone to produce the most advanced mathematical solutions, with only an extremely basic grasp of numeracy.
So what I said is obviously an exaggeration, but it illustrates an extremely valid point. You don't have to have advanced numerical skills to be a mathematical genius.
|
|
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
|
|
Magic Man
Chief Pilot
Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: South Wales
Points: 5336
|
Posted: 06 Nov 2008 at 10:44pm |
Odai you do realise that questioning Martin on these things is opening yourself up to a world of hurt... And I think I know him enough know to say that he's right on these matters and perhaps you are letting your new enthusiasm and young age get carried away a little...
Martin is not of "young age"  and so has a little more (quite a bit actually) knowledge of these things under his belt.
|
|
Odai
Chief Pilot
Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Location: NW England
Points: 3731
|
Posted: 06 Nov 2008 at 11:33pm |
What new enthusiasm? 
Actually, I reckon the fact that he seems to understand little about maths itself misleads him a bit.
I'm also using the fact that I've actually attempted the sort of maths material I'm on about (look up STEP), and so consider myself to be wiser on this thing.
|
|
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
|
|
MartinW
Moderator in Command
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722
|
Posted: 07 Nov 2008 at 10:21am |
Einstein was a genius without doubt, and a skilled mathematician, but compared to many of his piers, he was not regarded as extraordinary.
Much of his life is open to speculation, as is the role of his wife in his work, but she did assist him, that much is known.
I'm afraid the attitude magic refers to is precisely why I no longer have an interest in discussing these things with you.
I don't know where you got the idea Einstein was not "as good as" other physicists with respect to his mathematical genius, but it's simply not true.
The idea his wife helped him is absurd.
Mileva Maric-Einstein
(December 19, 1875 - August 4, 1948)
The Year 2008 is 60 Years Since the Death of Mileva Maric
Mileva Maric Einstein was the first wife of Albert Einstein. Mileva was his companion, mathematician, and co-worker on the "Theory of Relativity". Mileva was a Serbian woman from the Serbian city of Novi Sad. Newest evidence suggests that Mileva's role in formulating the "Theory of Relativity" was significant. |
|
TO MANY he is the greatest scientist who ever lived, but a unique collection of Albert Einstein's letters and papers has revealed a history of struggle and failure made worse by an apparently shaky grasp of maths.
"A lot of people think of Einstein as a mathematical genius — he wasn't," said Plymouth University physicist David McMullan. He said Einstein used Dr Straus as he had used other mathematically gifted colleagues in his early career. |
|
|
Odai
Chief Pilot
Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Location: NW England
Points: 3731
|
Posted: 07 Nov 2008 at 10:32am |
It may be true his wife helped him with his earlier theories, but she definitely did not help him with special relativity.
Have a look at that.
Martin, as I've said, I have no idea what you know about theoretical physics, you don't appear to know enough about it to judge how good einstein was.
To come up with something like spec.rel requires extraordinary genius, and yes, as much as other physicists at the time. Please tell me where you heard the idea he wasn't regarded as intelligent as others.
|
|
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
|
|
MartinW
Moderator in Command
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722
|
Posted: 07 Nov 2008 at 10:49am |
I didn't mention special relativity.
I didn't say he wasn't as intelligent, just that his mathematical ability wasn't regraded as anything special, many of his piers were superior in that respect.
you don't appear to know enough about it to judge how good einstein was.
Maybe not, but the physicist below does.
"A lot of people think of Einstein as a mathematical genius — he wasn't," said Plymouth University physicist David McMullan. He said Einstein used Dr Straus as he had used other mathematically gifted colleagues in his early career.
As for his wifes abilities and assistance, there are plenty of sites on the Internet that claim greater or lesser contribution, but as I said, she did assist him.
When you disagree with me and then say...
The idea his wife helped him (with spec.rel anyway) is absurd.
Adding the bit in brackets, that implies you do accept the possibility that she assisted with other areas of his work, thus agreeing with me, makes it very frustrating.
I'm not interested in debating anything with you.
|
|
Tweet
A book recommendation for you mathematitian's!