What is undergraduate math like beyond the calculus sequence?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of undergraduate mathematics beyond the calculus sequence, exploring the transition from computational to more theoretical and proof-based mathematics. Participants share their experiences and insights regarding the challenges and expectations of advanced math courses.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant reflects on their journey through math courses, expressing a desire to understand what lies beyond calculus and questioning the accessibility of advanced topics for someone with average math skills.
  • Another participant emphasizes that success in math is more about effort than innate ability, sharing a personal anecdote about a friend who initially struggled but succeeded after committing to the work.
  • It is noted that upper-level math tends to be less computational and more theoretical, requiring deeper logical thinking and understanding of concepts.
  • Several participants discuss the nature of proof-based mathematics, highlighting that it differs significantly from previous math experiences and suggesting that engaging with proof problems can be a way to gauge interest in pure math.
  • Some participants express differing preferences regarding reading versus writing proofs, indicating that while some find writing proofs easier, others struggle with understanding proofs written by others.
  • A list of potential undergraduate and graduate math topics is provided, showcasing the breadth of subjects that may be encountered in advanced studies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that advanced mathematics involves a shift towards more theoretical work, but there is no consensus on the ease of this transition or the nature of individual experiences with proof-based math.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various proof techniques and the challenges associated with them, but there is no resolution on the best approaches to mastering these concepts. The discussion reflects a range of personal experiences and preferences regarding mathematical learning.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students considering advanced mathematics courses, those interested in the nature of proof-based math, and individuals reflecting on their own mathematical journeys.

Pascal's Pal
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I currently attend a community college.

For several semesters I did poorly--failed one class and dropped out of a fair amount, but then I turned things around and consistently received decent grades. The track I am currently on is "Business Administration"--in short, I plan to study accounting, but I kind of don't want to go to college to merely learn a trade, so I want to supplement my job training with the acquisition of knowledge of eternal value. Math seems to fit this description.

When I was dropping classes, one class I dropped several times was Pre Calc with Trig. As much as I tried it seemed that I simply couldn't get the material. I guess the placement test was wrong or I wasn't trying hard enough. Anyway, for one semester I avoided it and simply got an intermdiate algebra textbook from my library and worked it cover to cover. I tried the course again and got an A, and afterwards I took Calc 1 and 2 and got As in them too. Currently I'm enrolled in linear algebra, and all the other math courses my community college offers (Calc 3, Diff Q) seem doable. In short, I'm sort of on a roll, but what is math like beyond the calculus sequence and is it doable for someone with mere average math smarts?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Well, I'm going to state this. Doing well in math has little do with natural ability but more to do with work. My example is a friend of mine who is absolutely brilliant in mathematics. He ended up failing Calc II with a 44. He did little work and it showed in his grade and in his understanding. He later retook the course and ended up with an A but only after he did all his work and went to class!

So Calc III and Diff Q are more than doable for someone like yourself (hey, I managed!).

As for the question presented in the title, the math because more complicated per se. It is less computational and more theoretical. As my professor told me in my first proof writing class, "Congratulations, you have moved passed engineering type math and into real math!"

Upper level math will require you to think harder than you had to before, remember a lot more, and understand basic logic. It takes a lot of hard work, but if you are willing to spend the time, you can do it.
 
proof based math is very little like the math you've been doing. in each section of problem in your calc book look for the ones that start with "prove that..." do a couple, if you enjoy it then you might enjoy pure math. personally i like reading proofs but hate doing em
 
the appendix of your calculus book may cover a few of the proof techniques, such as induction, contradiction, contrapositive, etc. There should be example problems that use these techniques. Then, you can try to do problmes that involve proofs. Only problem is that the book doesn't give the answer for proof problems
 
ice109 said:
proof based math is very little like the math you've been doing. in each section of problem in your calc book look for the ones that start with "prove that..." do a couple, if you enjoy it then you might enjoy pure math. personally i like reading proofs but hate doing em

I'm actually just the opposite, i like doing proofs but it takes a lot out of me to read some one else's.
 
mathis314 said:
I'm actually just the opposite, i like doing proofs but it takes a lot out of me to read some one else's.

I agree. While doing a proof you can at least understand where you are coming from, while reading a proof by someone else, it takes a lot more effort to understand all the steps. At least for me. I used to hate reading proofs presented in my Calc book, because, at the time, I couldn't figure out how the writer was clever enough to prove the statements. Now, I understand more, but with my current level of math, I still feel, "how did this guy do it!?" Oh well, :D
 
undrgrad:

calc - diff eq - linear alg - sev vbls calc - series and sequences - proofs and logic - analysis (metric spaces) - groups, rings, fields - topology -

grad:
infinite diml linear alg (banach space) - measure theory - algebraic topology - homological algebra - dif geom/manifolds - alg geom, curves surfaces, abeian varieties, moduli - group reps - quantum groups - numerical analysis -------
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K