Should I re-read theory and errors or just go straight to practice?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cdux
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Errors Theory
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the value of reviewing extensive notes versus focusing on new exercises in a complex subject with both theoretical and practical components. The original poster has created a substantial amount of notes but is uncertain whether to revisit them or pursue additional exercises. Responses emphasize the need for clarity in the question posed, suggesting that more specific details about the subject would lead to better guidance. Participants advise balancing review and practice, encouraging the poster to focus on understanding the material through exercises if comprehension is lacking. Overall, the conversation highlights the importance of clear communication in seeking academic advice and the need for a practical approach to studying.
cdux
Messages
187
Reaction score
0
I am interested in a subject that is only tested on exercises, however it has also a lengthy theory. I have gone through the theory and I have made notes on parts I wasn't aware of at first. I have also gone through the introductory exercises by myself and I have made notes on points I wasn't aware of at first. The length of that 'book' is quite, about 50 pages of convoluted notes and subnotes that may expand to other material or between one another.

The question is, is it of great value to go through those notes or go through new exercises only? Or should I combine it somehow?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How would you answer the question "I made some notes that you can't see on a subject I won't name. Are they valuable?"
 
Vanadium 50 said:
How would you answer the question "I made some notes that you can't see on a subject I won't name. Are they valuable?"

I wouldn't assume I know every subject. This is academic guidance, not of a specific subject.

Anyway, thanks for making it clear you are more interested in being sarcastic. Bye.
 
cdux said:
I wouldn't assume I know every subject. This is academic guidance, not of a specific subject.

Anyway, thanks for making it clear you are more interested in being sarcastic. Bye.

You're being incredibly vague as is. Are you looking for study tips or just trying to cause a hard time?

It would help if you could be more specific about what you need help with ( maybe even include the topic you happen to be studying for ). Then perhaps you can receive a well structured response from somebody.
 
Having seen your prior posts, you're over thinking it. Think less and do more. If you don't grasp the topic, practice. If you get it, move on.

I agree with the other posters. OP's question is not clear nor answerable.
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...
Back
Top