Optimal Strategies for Studying Textbooks in Mathematics: Tips from a Scientist

  • Thread starter Thread starter ronaldor9
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Study Textbook
AI Thread Summary
Effective strategies for studying mathematics textbooks emphasize understanding over completion. It's recommended to focus on problems that challenge your comprehension rather than attempting all exercises, especially if they are repetitive. Engaging with example exercises before consulting solutions can enhance learning, as attempting proofs independently fosters deeper understanding. Skipping redundant questions and prioritizing those that require critical thinking is crucial for skill development. Ultimately, a balanced approach tailored to individual understanding and comfort with the material leads to more effective learning outcomes.
ronaldor9
Messages
91
Reaction score
1
I am curious about how others read and study from textbooks. Do you generally do all the exercises in the text; a sample from all difficulty levels; only the medium level questions.
For me, personally, I get fixated on trying to do all the questions. Currently I have discovered this isint the most realistic, but I can't help myself, I often feel as if i will miss something important if I don't do them all.

What about you? what strategies have you developed, recommend, and use?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
There are numerous factors to weigh in, and this is why what anyone else does to study from a textbook could be a completely wrong approach for you to take.
- How easily do you understand the topic?
- Are you comfortably answering the beginner questions, intermediate questions, etc.?
You must also realize that a lot of Mathematics is about applying what you already know, so doing millions of questions all based on the same idea could touch up your skills, but may also give you too much dependence on completing repetitive tasks and thus hinder your ability to put much thought into questions.

Basically, if you find the topic easy, skip a few questions that look to be just another slight variation to all the others you've already done.
 
Do just a portion of any set of similar problems, like if three problems seem to be too much the same, just do two of them. Before reaching the exercise sets at the back of the section, try to solve the example exercises on your own, and try to only use the book-displayed solutions and hints and help before you check how the book solution is.
 
Try to do the proofs and examples yourself before reading them. Even if you don't succeed, you'll learn more from reading the solution than if you hadn't tried it. Don't rush through a theorem that you don't completely understand. Math isn't like reading a novel in that you might need to stare at a single sentence for several minutes before getting it. After you've read and understand the chapter, do all or most of the proofs and the problems that require ingenuity but not necessarily all the repetitive computations.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
34
Views
6K
Replies
102
Views
5K
Replies
10
Views
686
Replies
13
Views
5K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Back
Top