Which rules/theorems should you be able to prove?

  • Thread starter Dafe
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation is about a person who is considering pursuing a masters degree in applied mathematics and is seeking advice on which rules and theorems from calculus they should be proficient in, as well as refreshing their knowledge in linear algebra, differential equations, and physics. The suggestion is made to practice and study proofs, particularly in analysis, and to also consider exploring partial differential equations. The importance of having a strong foundation in pure mathematics is emphasized.
  • #1
Dafe
145
0
Hi,

I was thinking back at the days when I took calculus and how we had to prove things like the product rule etc.
Of course, most of that has magically disappeared from my mind.

I've decided to try and take a masters degree in applied mathematics, and have about a year to get my head back into the math-business.

What do you guys think are the most important rules/theorems one should be able to prove, say from calculus.
All of them? :)

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I am tempted to say "all of them"! Not from memory, of course. If I were you, I would take a calculus book and go through the theorems in it, first trying to prove each without looking at the proof in the book. If you are not sucessful, look at a few lines of the proof, then try to go on from there. Actually, that's the way you should always study mathematics.
 
  • #3
I was afraid you would say that :)
I just began going through my old calculus book, and will do as you say.

calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, physics, so many things in applied math.
No wonder you guys are crazy.

Thanks HallsofIvy
 
  • #4
Agreed; find a real good theoretical, rigorous textbook like Spivak Calculus or Hardy's Pure Mathematics so that you have the foundation for potentially being able to prove whatever you want.
 
  • #5
travisjeffery has a good point. I recommend not picking up your old calculus book (which one was it?). Have you had an analysis course before? I would recommend going through either Calculus by Michael Spivak (as travisjeffery said) or Calculus by Tom Apostol. Apostol covers a lot of material, but Spivak may be more readable and has an answer book. I would then try to get some analysis in, try Mathematical Analysis by Tom Apostol. Analysis by Steven Lay is great introduction to doing proofs in calculus and basic analysis if you have never taken a proof class.

Since you are going into applied mathematics, I would also recommend refreshing or relearning linear algebra and differential equations. Also, partial differential equations would be a good thing to study as well.
 
  • #6
Hi, my calculus book(s) were the ones by Edwards and Penney.
I've heard the Spivak book mentioned on several occasions so I will have a look.

n!kofeyn: I bought Gilbert Strangs Linear Algebra book and am going through it while looking at his lectures.
The Linear Algebra course I took at uni was awful.
The mit ocw course on the other hand is wonderful! As soon as I complete it, I will go through the mit differential equations course.

Got a lot of learning/refreshing to do!
 
  • #7
Dafe said:
Hi, my calculus book(s) were the ones by Edwards and Penney.
I've heard the Spivak book mentioned on several occasions so I will have a look.

n!kofeyn: I bought Gilbert Strangs Linear Algebra book and am going through it while looking at his lectures.
The Linear Algebra course I took at uni was awful.
The mit ocw course on the other hand is wonderful! As soon as I complete it, I will go through the mit differential equations course.

Got a lot of learning/refreshing to do!

Cool. I'm really not for sure of the rigor of all applied programs, but at my school the applied students have to take a substantial amount of pure mathematics. So just be sure you get some practice in doing abstract proofs in analysis and linear algebra. Analysis seems to almost always be the kicker (it was for me!). Don't worry about proofs in differential equations, and like I said, if you have time, try to look into some PDEs.
 

1. What is the importance of being able to prove rules and theorems in science?

The ability to prove rules and theorems is crucial in science as it allows us to establish the validity and credibility of our findings. By providing evidence and logical reasoning, we can confidently make claims and draw conclusions about the natural world.

2. How do scientists determine which rules and theorems to prove?

Scientists typically choose to prove rules and theorems that are relevant to their specific area of study and have practical applications. They may also focus on proving fundamental principles that serve as the foundation for further scientific discoveries.

3. What are some common methods used to prove rules and theorems?

There are various methods used to prove rules and theorems, including deductive reasoning, mathematical proofs, and experimental evidence. Scientists may also use computer simulations or statistical analysis to support their proofs.

4. Can rules and theorems be revised or proven wrong?

Yes, rules and theorems are subject to revision and can be proven wrong if new evidence or counterexamples are found. This is a natural part of the scientific process, as it allows for the improvement and refinement of our understanding of the world.

5. Are there any ethical considerations to keep in mind when proving rules and theorems?

Yes, scientists must ensure that their methods and findings are ethical and do not harm individuals or the environment. They must also consider potential biases and ensure that their research is conducted in an unbiased and inclusive manner.

Similar threads

Replies
66
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
267
  • General Math
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
10
Replies
333
Views
11K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • Calculus
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • General Math
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
37
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
3
Views
797
Back
Top