- #1
pergradus
- 138
- 1
Richard Feynman once remarked during a lecture that the invention of analytical methods such as calculus allowed people to "be more stupid", in reference to solving problems. I think he was on to something with that remark.
Often when faced with a problem which requires me to set up some kind of picture, I have to resort to "brute force" methods of calculus or lots of algebraic manipulation, and I find myself unable to offer a geometric argument for what I'm trying to show - even though I suspect the geometric argument is far more simple and elegant.
I was thinking this summer maybe I should really focus on learning some geometry to help me develop some real mathematical skills, instead of what I feel like is the systematic and uninspired way you learn in school. (I am a physics student btw, not a math student). Starting with the master, Euclid and seeing where that leads me. Just wondering what some opinions are about this and if you agree or disagree with this sentiment.
Often when faced with a problem which requires me to set up some kind of picture, I have to resort to "brute force" methods of calculus or lots of algebraic manipulation, and I find myself unable to offer a geometric argument for what I'm trying to show - even though I suspect the geometric argument is far more simple and elegant.
I was thinking this summer maybe I should really focus on learning some geometry to help me develop some real mathematical skills, instead of what I feel like is the systematic and uninspired way you learn in school. (I am a physics student btw, not a math student). Starting with the master, Euclid and seeing where that leads me. Just wondering what some opinions are about this and if you agree or disagree with this sentiment.