MHB Solve Linear Algebra Exercises: Tips & Techniques

  • Thread starter Thread starter caffeinemachine
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the challenges of solving exercises in Linear Algebra, particularly from Axler's "Linear Algebra Done Right." Participants express frustration with the difficulty of approaching problems "from scratch" without relying on previously learned results. While using key results simplifies problem-solving, there is a recognition that developing original solutions can enhance understanding and foster creative thinking. The conversation emphasizes the importance of balancing the use of established theorems with the pursuit of originality in problem-solving. It is noted that mastering foundational knowledge is crucial before attempting to solve problems independently. The thread encourages a flexible approach to learning, suggesting that utilizing known results is acceptable and can lead to deeper insights. Overall, the dialogue highlights the transition many face in mathematical learning, advocating for a blend of traditional and innovative problem-solving methods.
caffeinemachine
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
799
Reaction score
15
Here's something that's been bugging me for quite some time.

I have been reading Linear Algebra Done Right by Axler. By the time I reached to the exercises at the end of chapter 5, I started realizing that I was not able to solve the exercises "from scratch". The exercises seemed trivial if I used some key results from the chapter but when I tried to think naturally and "originally" I either was not able to get anywhere or I discovered some fantastic new (usually long) solution at the cost of spending a lot of time on the question; where the former occurred more frequently. (And this also goes for Abstract Algebra and other mathematical disciplines).

Now here's my question. What according to you is the right way to do it? Mugging a few results makes things a lot easier that just tackling the question with having zero prior knowledge.

How do you guys do it? How much do you think your previous problem solving experience matters to you? How much do you depend on theorems or results you have previously read?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In general, it's expected for you to use those key results when doing the exercises. They may be trivial, but you get at least some practice in applying them in different contexts, whereas doing things "from scratch" is good when you already have a decent grasp of the tools at your disposal. It takes time and great efforts, but you also acquire great experience in thinking differently. I just believe it's best used once you've mastered the usual knowledge, else you're missing out on a lot.

Remember that "originality" comes in many forms: solving problems without pre-existing tools, using pre-existing tools for a completely different subject, using pre-existing tools in a very innovative way, creating tools tailored to your problem and finding out it applies to several others. Don't be too hard on yourself: it's fun to fight "left-handed" sometimes, but don't let it become a severe restriction to your learning.

As for me, I have no qualms to using results I know, wherever they come from. My previous problem solving experiences taught me that I often tackle "ill-equipped" or underusing techniques, so I decided to keep as much as I can at hand.

Bear in mind this is all my honest opinion and it might not really match what you had in mind.:D
 
Fantini said:
In general, it's expected for you to use those key results when doing the exercises. They may be trivial, but you get at least some practice in applying them in different contexts, whereas doing things "from scratch" is good when you already have a decent grasp of the tools at your disposal. It takes time and great efforts, but you also acquire great experience in thinking differently. I just believe it's best used once you've mastered the usual knowledge, else you're missing out on a lot.

Remember that "originality" comes in many forms: solving problems without pre-existing tools, using pre-existing tools for a completely different subject, using pre-existing tools in a very innovative way, creating tools tailored to your problem and finding out it applies to several others. Don't be too hard on yourself: it's fun to fight "left-handed" sometimes, but don't let it become a severe restriction to your learning.

As for me, I have no qualms to using results I know, wherever they come from. My previous problem solving experiences taught me that I often tackle "ill-equipped" or underusing techniques, so I decided to keep as much as I can at hand.

Bear in mind this is all my honest opinion and it might not really match what you had in mind.:D

Seems like you've been through the painful transition phase I am currently going through. Thanks man, your post really helped.

Other math wizards, your opinions are welcomed too.
 
caffeinemachine said:
Here's something that's been bugging me for quite some time.

I have been reading Linear Algebra Done Right by Axler. By the time I reached to the exercises at the end of chapter 5, I started realizing that I was not able to solve the exercises "from scratch". The exercises seemed trivial if I used some key results from the chapter but when I tried to think naturally and "originally" I either was not able to get anywhere or I discovered some fantastic new (usually long) solution at the cost of spending a lot of time on the question; where the former occurred more frequently. (And this also goes for Abstract Algebra and other mathematical disciplines).

Now here's my question. What according to you is the right way to do it? Mugging a few results makes things a lot easier that just tackling the question with having zero prior knowledge.

How do you guys do it? How much do you think your previous problem solving experience matters to you? How much do you depend on theorems or results you have previously read?

The point of Linear Algebra Done Right is to get you to think about Linear Algebra in a very different way from "usual" Linear Algebra texts. So, don't just do the questions - you want to do them they way they the author would do them! (That is, if you ever use a determinant in an argument, then there is probably a different way...)
 
Swlabr said:
The point of Linear Algebra Done Right is to get you to think about Linear Algebra in a very different way from "usual" Linear Algebra texts. So, don't just do the questions - you want to do them they way they the author would do them! (That is, if you ever use a determinant in an argument, then there is probably a different way...)
Yeah that's right. I was not talking especially about Axler's book. Mentioned it just as an example.
 
Similar to the 2024 thread, here I start the 2025 thread. As always it is getting increasingly difficult to predict, so I will make a list based on other article predictions. You can also leave your prediction here. Here are the predictions of 2024 that did not make it: Peter Shor, David Deutsch and all the rest of the quantum computing community (various sources) Pablo Jarrillo Herrero, Allan McDonald and Rafi Bistritzer for magic angle in twisted graphene (various sources) Christoph...
Thread 'My experience as a hostage'
I believe it was the summer of 2001 that I made a trip to Peru for my work. I was a private contractor doing automation engineering and programming for various companies, including Frito Lay. Frito had purchased a snack food plant near Lima, Peru, and sent me down to oversee the upgrades to the systems and the startup. Peru was still suffering the ills of a recent civil war and I knew it was dicey, but the money was too good to pass up. It was a long trip to Lima; about 14 hours of airtime...
Back
Top