Should i still do math if i am not the next Euler?

[pdidy]

How do you guys deal with the fact that even though you enjoy Mathematics or Physics, you will probably never be the next Euler, Gauss, Nash, Einstein, Feynman etc? It really puts me off reading about how talented these people were.

Sometimes i just feel redundent. I will get frustrated when i can't understand something and i will feel stupid. The same thing occurs when i get a problem wrong, i will get quite pissed off and tell myself "fine this is it, no more maths for me" or "there goes being a math major"

Should i still do mathematics if i don't have that Gift? Honestly i need help in deciding wether its ok and if so, how to motivate myself to continue...

sorry if this post was a bit of a ramble

 

[Dadface]

My first reaction is that you may not be the next euler but you are the first pdidy.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

It's a bit childish to think every professional mathematician or physicist wins prizes such as nobel,fields etc.
Like every field there are medicore workers and there are the excellent, the reason you hear of one rather than the other is a lot of luck.
If you like maths and physics and want to work in related work go ahead and learn it, if in the way you see that's overwhelming then change field of study.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

My first reaction is that you may not be the next euler but you are the first pdidy.

No, there's already a pdidy who is a rap singer.

 

[Dadface]

No, there's already a pdidy who is a rap singer.

Perhaps our pdidy here and the rap singer are one and the same

 

[jmason52]

You deal with it by sucking it up and moving on. I serioulsy doubt that any of those people you mentioned worried a whit about who they might be like. Instead, they went out and did the best they could at what they loved. Be an individual; make your own mark.

 

[Klockan3]

You have no idea how much stupid people there are in maths and physics, people usually cope by working really hard to get a mechanical feel of the subject. You can do a lot of contributions with that but you will never revolutionize any field if you are just using old tricks. The fact that you can't be the greatest doesn't mean that you are useless.

 

[lisab]

but seriously how do you guys deal with being unable to solve a problem or understand a concept.

sigh i wish i was Ed Witten.

Because I *absolutely love* figuring it out.

Besides, being super-super-smart is just like having 4-wheel drive on your vehicle; it is only a means to get stuck in ever more remote places.

Not that I know that first hand .

 

[MissSilvy]

This seems to be common in science fields. I forgot where I heard or read it, but someone once said that it's a major world-shift for most scientists when they discover they may not be the next Euler/Feynman/whoever and they do one of three things; drop out, spend the rest of their professional lives hiding the fact, or accepting it and moving on. Great physicists aren't super-humans who never got problems wrong or made mistakes. What distinguished them from average Joes is a combination of luck, determination, and patience with perhaps some natural talent. Einstein didn't become good at physics by cursing himself for every problem he ever missed and worrying about whether he was smarter than Newton.

If you find yourself not understanding math to your satisfaction, the remedy is not to grind through problems in books until you memorize the procedures for doing them. The remedy is to branch out and develop your problem-solving skills and knowledge of the field as a whole. I'm not a mathematician, but I know in physics that knowing the 'how' and 'why' and thinking through the theories and equations yourself is more useful than just trying to do a zillion problems out of a college textbook. Just my two cents, take it with a grain of salt, etc.

An no offense Klockan, but do you always run around these forums and bring people down? :/ Telling people that they're stupid and will only ever be cogs in the machine seems to be a recurring trend for you.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Two orthogonal comments:

How did Euler know he was going to be the first Euler?

What is it with science and mathematics that provokes questions like this? You don't see it in other fields:

"If I can't be the star pitcher for the Red Sox, why learn to play baseball?"
"If I can't be a general - and also receive the medal of honor - why enlist in the army?"
"If I can't be a CEO of a Fortune 100 company, why go into business?"

 

[Tedjn]

Believe it or not, I don't find this question childish at all. I'm sure most of us had to deal with this at some point in our lives. In fact, when I'm stuck I like to allow myself to wonder how more accomplished (read: brilliant) people would think about the problem. In the end, however, I study math because, like others, I enjoy figuring out problems. I like reading about what others have discovered. And even though at this point there seems to be so much math I still don't know, I do still harbor some ambition that I might contribute something in the future, maybe through hard work.

Vanadium's comment is also interesting. Personally, I think science and math provoke such questions because scientists and mathematicians want to contribute to the whole but don't always see how (I certainly don't at this point). This isn't always true for baseball, business, or the military.

 

[Acut]

Well, I've tried to let you optimistic with my previous posts. Performing well in competitions isn't a sign you will suceed in sciences. But independent of your results, you should accept the fact that the chances you do something truly, really amazing are very little. Chances of succeding increase dramatically if you are more worried in doing a good job than receiving some kind of prize.

Reading about somebody else's achievement is a experience of humbleness, for sure. However, you shouldn't take it as depressive: they really aren't. If I were you, I would reconsider trying a career in Math or sciences. If you can't accept you aren't in the top of the world, science won't be the best place for you. Remarkably, of all people I've met in olympiads, I can't remember a single one which wasn't humble, despite their achievements. Even the very top students are afraid of the exams (I'm surely afraid of them), and know there's always luck involved in competitions: you may be in first place, but this doesn't mean you are better than anybody else. I'm quite sure that people who receive the nobel prize also know that (even those who became arrogant when receiving it).

Do you want a career in Math for the pleasure or for the fame?
Think about it.

 

[novop]

Besides all of this, you'll never be the best at anything, realistically. So in light of this, do it if you enjoy it.

 

[Acut]

And you seem to be too worried about making mistakes.
If all those "great people" didn't do any mistakes, there would be nothing to study in sciences nowadays. Thinking deeply, we need new people in science because our predecessors have made mistakes. Science has a chance to grow when we find where they've gone wrong. Our sucessors will also find our mistakes.

As 't Hofft points out, thinking we've done everything correctly is a great way of damaging science: http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Our sucessors will also find our mistakes.

And will make their own mistakes.

 

[TMFKAN64]

There are really two answers here... First, there is a need for mathematicians and scientists who are *not* Euler or Einstein. Science is a large body of knowledge, and many people are needed who simply carry this knowledge forward to the next generation and hopefully hand it to the *next* Euler or Einstein. Secondly, what else are you going to do? In any line of work you choose, the chances of being the very best at it are stunningly remote.

 

[stevenb]

How do you guys deal with the fact that even though you enjoy Mathematics or Physics, you will probably never be the next Euler, Gauss, Nash, Einstein, Feynman etc? It really puts me off reading about how talented these people were.

Wasn't it Newton who said something about seeing farther by standing on the shoulders of giants?

He also made a comparison of his work to being like picking up shells on a sea-shore.

Personally, I've always felt grateful to those past geniuses for allowing me to see far, and I've always enjoyed what I do too much to worry about how good I actually am.

 

[Integral]

Wasn't it Newton who said something about seeing farther by standing on the shoulders of giants?

He also made a comparison of his work to being like picking up shells on a sea-shore.

Personally, I've always felt grateful to those past geniuses for allowing me to see far, and I've always enjoyed what I do too much to worry about how good I actually am.

According to John Gribbin this comment was actually a dig at Hooke who was not exactly on Newton's favorite people list. Evidently Hooke was quite short, ie NOT a giant. So he was saying he owes nothing to Hooke.

 

[Noxide]

but i sometimes make the stupidist mistakes or ask the stupidist questions which turn out to be wrong. I don't feel as if there is any hope for me in maths/science.
For example it took me a whole week to understand trivial calculus topics such as the connection between the second derivative and concativity.

What's to understand?

if positive on an interval then concave up on that interval
if negative on an interval then concave down on that interval
...or you can think of it as the rate of change of the first deriv.

Maybe it just wasn't explained to you properly the first time? Some profs teach by induction... i.e. they give you examples and you draw conclusions for the general case...you might be better suited for profs who give you definitions and theorems first. I prefer the latter as they are rather easy to riefy and apply.

If you're having trouble with things like this then you should forget entirely about being the next Euler and think about whether or not you will even be able to complete a degree. You need natural talent and hard work to be great. This means taking notes and doing the homework even if you don't need to take notes or do the homework...

 

[Noxide]

So, construction for 40 years?

I'm not going to sugar coat it. There are a lot of people in university that should not be there. A lot. However, if you can do the work and if you are excited/interested by it then by all means go ahead and do the work. Don't just quit because someone on the internet makes you sad.

 

[lisab]

I am not a math major. I am a high school student. Thank you Noxide you make me feel so much better (sarcasm) if anything you have made me feel more depressed. I didn't say it took me a week to understand just that. I was learning other things too. And what's more i don't like just being told something, i want to understand why it works. So in this case i wanted to understand Why the second derivative measured concativity. I UNDERSTAND IT NOW, It was just an example.

So should i pretty much just give up on maths/science and accept my idiocy/redundancy in these subjects and move on? I guess i am just not gifted enough. It makes me sad, but i guess crap happens...

You will likely regret making up your mind, at your age, to turn away from science and math. There will always be people greater and lesser than you, and there's no shame in that, none.

So it took you a while to get a concept...didn't it feel great when it finally sunk in? You'll find that on this site, the vast, vast majority of students have to work--often very very hard--to learn science and math.

Frankly I find people who say that it's easy to be boring braggarts (and they're likely liars, too).

 

[thrill3rnit3]

All those people you named [ Euler, Gauss, Nash, Einstein, Feynman ] were passionate about their specific fields not because of fame or award, but because of deep love for scientific discovery. They were in it not for the prize, but as Feynman always said, for the "kick of the discovery".

Would you guys say i am too stupid to continue mathematics (not that you have enough information to judge) if i say that i often make stupid mistakes and so on.

Nope, stupid mistakes mean that you don't practice enough. By practicing you see where you commit errors, and you should work on eliminating them.

 

[eveo]

Instead of memorizing concepts and their applications, understand them and you'll be able to derive conclusions. An example of this trigonometric identities, many people just memorize and hope for the best, but if you learn the foundation of trig and learn to derive identities and how they are formed, it will be much easier.

This is very common and might be your problem. Another is I doubt you spent a quarter of the amount of time you should be. A week at 15 minutes a day as opposed to a day with 1:45m spent on something in very different. It takes nights, days, nights, some more nights and maybe a few more days to really know what you are doing.

Keep at it, Euler didn't just wake up with math a priori.

 

[The Chaz]

...
I'm not going to sugar coat it. There are a lot of people in university that should not be there. A lot. ...

And there are a lot of people giving bad advice on the forums to disillusioned kids. A lot.

Don't give up, pdidy.

Now for a commentary on the current state of things, with references to a certain "joker" from "mymathforum.com":
The amount of knowledge/discovery/etc in recent years has left us in a sort of "Goldilocks" state of affairs. Most "problems" nowadays are either too hard to solve, or trivial. It's tough to find a problem that is "just right". For instance, can you prove that there are infinite primes? I would classify this as "too easy", since anyone who has seen the creative insight can duplicate the proof. (Note: the insight was probably the result of HARD WORK!)
But now we're into other difficulties. The infinite number of primes doesn't help you with the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, or probably any classes that you'll be taking. So this pursuit (and/or others like it) is discarded in favor of more "practical" ones.

The joker replies to homework questions in two ways:
1) "freaking easy" (insert answer here)
2) can't be done.

 

[chiro]

I think if you really want something (and I mean so in a "no remorse" kinda way) then you will succeed in doing something substantial. Let me give you a few examples:

1. Andrew Wiles

In biographies it is said that at around the age of 12 he took an avid interest in Fermats last theorem. Naturally if you are introduced to something at that age, and are passionate you end up having an advantage of having the extra years for further development, thought, and refinement and clarification of ideas, questions, and concepts.

2. Albert Einstein

Like Wiles, Einstein thought about things at an early age. In early stages of his life he was labeled as "possibly retarded".

With these two examples, another common thing is that both of them really had the tenacity and patience to do math/physics.

My guess is that if you take the same "mental approach" (by this I mean attitude towards a pursuit of some goal be it intellectual or not), then you will increase the odds of becoming successful whether that means publicly and/or personally. If you want something and I mean really want something, all the mistakes in the world will not stop you from getting what you want and will increase the chances of you getting there in the end.

I have to say though that you are not alone pdidy in your perception of failure. The problem is that a lot of people are taught to find what they are good at and focus on that. When failure is brought up, its automatically got negative connotations attached to it and thus causes people to create a negative self-image of themselves and automatically associate "failure" with "bad".

The only failure does in my mind is remind us that we are human. If humans didn't get over their failures though then I doubt that we would any form of technology because we would have given up after our first encounter with failure.

Its purely psychological and like I said above, its not only you who is a victim of this.

Some advice for you pdidy: I would read about people who have made their mark on the human race in some field, or multiple fields and learn about where people screwed up. We all hear about success but I guarantee that for every success there are multiple screw-ups. With my example above, Andrew Wiles published an initial paper and it was found to be wrong.

So find out above the failures that people make and I hope that from this exercise, you will realize that these people were "mere mortals" just like yourself. I think you would be surprised just at how much potential the human race has.

 

[xcvxcvvc]

what's wrong with being confused? as long as you work hard to demystify the unknown, you will constantly receive a high for doing it. Never let anyone tell you the answer to a problem confusing you, because that ruins the puzzle.

 

[The Chaz]

thank you xc, chiro, i really appreciate it.

RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS HERE I COME! lol...

Just remember us little people when you make it big! And TAKE THE MONEY (unlike Perelman)!

 

[Some?]

As to your problem with understanding the concept of concavity, did you look up various explanations on the internet? I used to do this a lot, mostly because the math/science textbooks i had in hs didn't go as in depth as i would've liked, so i learned the extra stuff on the 'net. Often times this extra stuff can go a long way in understanding the course material better than everyone else--not to sound cocky or anything.
An interesting book that you might pick up, and in turn which might pick up your spirits with motivation, is The Outliers by Malcom Gladwell. He basically looks at successful people through the lens of a sociologist and points out the patterns and trends. It's pretty interesting stuff. You'll find that most of these top people are top mostly because of luck and opportunity, but also because of hard work and practice. So don't give up and create opportunities.
Good luck

 

[bignum]

I am in the same boat as you are, I feel like switching to engineering right now...

 

[Klockan3]

For example it took me a whole week to understand trivial calculus topics such as the connection between the second derivative and concativity.

But in the end you did understand it, many who studies maths don't bother with understanding things at all. I would say that it is a strength to go so far in order to make yourself satisfied with the concept rather than just accepting the explanation provided by the book.

Frankly I find people who say that it's easy to be boring braggarts (and they're likely liars, too).

That is a very shortsighted view to have, dismissing them as boring braggarts and most likely liars just makes you hide from the issue. There are certainly people who work a lot less than you and still do better in every regard, your viewpoint would hurt your prospects for socializing with these people for no other reason than that they are better than you at for example maths. Of course many of them might be boring (Like most people) and/or braggarts (Like most people who have something to brag about) and some might even be lying, but most likely this do not hold for all of them and it is dumb to dismiss them just because of your issues.