Why Are Infinite Concepts Misunderstood in Math Education?

  • Thread starter Thread starter loom91
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the misunderstanding of infinite concepts in math education, particularly in calculus. Participants express concern over the vague language used by educators, such as "very small" and "unimaginably small," which obscures the true definitions of limits and infinity. The conversation highlights the disparity between engineering math and pure mathematics, suggesting that the former often lacks the rigor necessary for a deep understanding of concepts like limits and infinity. The consensus is that a more precise and conceptually clear approach to teaching these topics is essential for improving student comprehension and appreciation of mathematics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus concepts, particularly limits and infinity.
  • Familiarity with the epsilon-delta definition of limits.
  • Knowledge of the differences between engineering mathematics and pure mathematics.
  • Basic grasp of mathematical history, particularly the contributions of mathematicians like Cantor.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the epsilon-delta definition of limits in calculus.
  • Explore the historical development of the concept of infinity in mathematics.
  • Study the differences between engineering mathematics and pure mathematics curricula.
  • Learn about the implications of teaching methodologies on student understanding of mathematical concepts.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics educators, curriculum developers, students of calculus, and anyone interested in improving the teaching and understanding of infinite concepts in mathematics.

  • #31
matt grime said:
Who said anything about justifying limits as 'approximate or subjective'? The fact that derivatives are used to linearize and approximate is what I was talking about and has nothing to do with what you think I said. Dont' get me wrong, I wish that maths were taught properly, but I don't think the problems you perceive are to do with poor understanding of the concepts by teachers. The course content is not decided by the teachers, or the mathematicians, but by the engineers who teach the output of the course. I think you're ascribing too much mathematical sophistication to the average student as well.

Further, I suggest you look up the space of dual numbers before saying much more.

This, also, makes little sense:

"as far as I know e^2 is a uniquely defined quantity that, being the limit of a strictly increasing positive sequence, is necessarily non-zero"

What limit of what strictly increasing sequence? e is just a symbol, and the ring of dual numbers is just the the ring k[e]/e^2. It is how algebraists do the algebraic version of differential geometry without taking limits which are usually meaningless in algebraic contexts.

I don't know what interpretation of e^x you are talking about and what meaning can be assigned to the statement e^2 = 0, but I don't think dual numbers have any relevance here. In the context of calculus, which we have been discussing here, e^2 is defined as the limit of a sequence of partial sums, and this limit is not 0.

I also don't think poor teaching is due to teachers not undersanding, it is due to them not teaching. I'm sure most teachers have a good understanding of what limits are, but as long as they are teaching wrong concepts to the students their internal knowledge is of little relevance.

I don't know why you are bringing engineers into this, I repeat that I'm not talking about engineering courses. It also has little to do with course content, I'm talking about teaching methods. As our chemistry teacher used to say, students lives are being destroyed because the lords of education are eternally afraid that too much stress will be placed upon the fragile minds of the students. The whole process is like trying to pull back the steering more to generat lift when the wing has already stalled: the situation goes from bad to worse.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
10K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K