The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: What physics and math topics do people find hardest to grasp?  (Read 18214 times)

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Hi everyone!

I'm trying to keep myself busy and am going to create some learning material for math and physics. I would like to ask everyone what the hardest parts of their learning in math and physics was and how we can help people overcome their difficulties.

Myself, I had a terrible time memorizing the multiplication tables. Even to this day I have trouble with it. I think its because I have a very poor memory. I learned that I sucked at arithmetic but was an ace in math because arithmetic is all about memorizing things and the algorithm to calculate numbers but math was easy for me because its abstract and visual and I'm good at those things.

When it comes to physics I had a terribly hard time with statistical mechanics. I think its because one has to have a solid grasp of combinatorics and I sucked at that.

This is the kind of thing I would like to ask you good folks to share even though I realize that itís a hard thing to do. After all who likes to put out there what we suck at. I donít mind because Iím no longer ashamed of it. Iíve come to understand and accept that part of myself. That way I can fight it.

If you have any suggestions on how I can overcome my difficulties in the above please share. Thanks!
« Last Edit: 19/05/2013 00:00:40 by Pmb »


 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: Where do people have trouble with physics and math
« Reply #1 on: 02/05/2013 09:03:52 »
Makes me remember a good friend from long time ago Pete. He was gifted when it came to understanding the principles behind mathematics, and I was rather poor in it :) So he once said that mathematics could be understood as logical symbols, even things you could hold in your hands, that you by some defined rules could twist and put together in combinations and treat one way, or the other. I don't think he ever made something from it but it stuck in my mind as a good idea. Wonder if it would be possible? To make it a game that you could give to kids to play with and from that intuitively learn maybe not all rules, but some of the hidden logic regarding mathematics, whatever form it takes?
 

Offline bizerl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
Re: Where do people have trouble with physics and math
« Reply #2 on: 03/05/2013 04:23:51 »
It's been a while since I've thought about Maths and I think my main problem was not studying enough, but I can remember that whenever we learned a new formula, the teacher would take the effort to go through how it was derived from basic principles. I found this really helpful and especially useful in exams when I couldn't remember the formula, but could remember how to derive it.

The problem with education is that different ways work for different people. Some people might be better at learning a few basic principles and extrapolating them out for whatever purpose, other people might do better at memorising large amounts of facts to call upon when required.
 

Offline damocles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Where do people have trouble with physics and math
« Reply #3 on: 03/05/2013 05:08:34 »
I have a very strong sense of pattern and spatial relationships. When I was quite young (about 5) my very wise father put up a chart on the back of the toilet door, where I would have plenty of time to contemplate it. It showed the relationships between numbers from 1 to 100 -- all of the numbers divisible by 5 were in 2 columns with an orange background shading. Those divisible by 8 were in blue squares, those divisible by 7 had a blue ring around them, divisible by 3 was a red font, by 9 a red font backed up with a red diagonal stripe, by 11 a black diagonal stripe running the other way.

This seemingly chaotic arrangement was capable of resolution into a number of patterns, especially as I was just learning to play chess at the time, and was fascinated by the knight's move. I found it expressed in the 8 times (10-2) and 7 times (20+1) tables. It started me out with a really good sense of number, based on an innate spatial sense.
« Last Edit: 04/05/2013 00:05:53 by damocles »
 

Offline lunar11

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: Where do people have trouble with physics and math
« Reply #4 on: 03/05/2013 23:34:38 »
I recall doing Quantum Mechanics in my Physics degree. It took me 6 months to get my head around the mathematical concepts. In the end I passed but I really did not know what I was doing. It was no longer a Physics course; it became a Maths course.
One of the major problems that students have in doing the maths in the Physics course is that there must be certain prerequisites that must be achieved.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
He, hear what you're saying Lunar. You start with grasping some principles, then you meet obstacles confounding you, as advanced mathematics but without basic premises explained? And doing them you sort of lose sight of what you first thought of as being principles, just to come back to them after more time passed, as the mathematics suddenly starts to make sense again?

The wheel of life huh :)

And you must have had a good, and patient, teacher Bizerl. Myself I like finding out how people thought something up, it makes it so much easier to understand how they got their results.
 

Offline yamo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 78
    • View Profile
I really hate the Monty Hall problem.  I just can't accept that changing doors makes a difference.
 

Offline damocles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
from yamo:
Quote
I really hate the Monty Hall problem.  I just can't accept that changing doors makes a difference.

What I cannot figure about the Monty Hall problem is why so many authorities say that the probability of success is only 1 in 2 if you change doors. The way I figure it is that you should try to pick the door that you are not expecting it to be behind, because if that fails (1 in 3) you will have a sure fire pointer to success (2 in 3).
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
That's a weird one alright. Saw someone explain it with a hundred doors instead, suddenly making it make sense. You have a hundred doors to pick from, you pick one of them. Then the game leader opens 98 of the other doors showing you nothing in them but goats. Now the question becomes one of keeping your original one that you picked randomly out of a hundred, not opened, or use the last door out of 99 that the game leader opened? It's a question of odds, and you picked one randomly from a hundred closed doors, but the 'other side' of it is the one where 98 doors was opened to find nothing, one left. It's like two games, the one you had from the beginning being the hardest to guess, wheres the one the game leader had being the 'foolproof' one. In reality it can't be foolproof as it could be your door too, but imagining it as two separate games makes it easier to see the reasoning.

and it is weird as you could imagine yourself not choosing any of those doors, waiting until the game leader opened 98 of them, then having two doors left to choose between. In that case you would have a 50/50 % probability of getting the right one, as I see it. Statistics as magic? :)
 

Offline damocles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Thankyou Yor_on! your example just highlights my reasoning! Because you only had a 1 in 100 chance of getting the first door right, then you are 99% sure if you change doors that you will be right after the game leader has opened 98 of them
 

Offline yamo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 78
    • View Profile
Could an analogy to superstates be used?  Rather than measuring where the Big Deal is, collapsing the function, we are measuring where it is not.
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
If a cat can be half dead, and half alive,

Does it still need to be fed?
 

Offline syhprum

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3822
  • Thanked: 19 times
    • View Profile
What I find difficult about maths is what do all the strange symbols represent I understand about half of them and have recently learnt about Bras and Kets but am always quite defeated by matrix's.
Arithmetic is no problem having grown up with the strange imperial units and £.S.D  money which hones ones skills.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8669
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
On a good day, with a following wind, I can do the maths for calculating angles in 512 dimensions (and, with the aid of a computer, I used to do it a lot).
But I have no real idea what it means.
« Last Edit: 06/05/2013 09:54:53 by Bored chemist »
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
If a cat can be half dead, and half alive,

Does it still need to be fed?
If it's Schrodinger's cat, it's both dead and alive, so you only need to feed the living version. You bury the dead version.

I once learned how to mentally calculate the day of the week of any given Georgian calendar date. It was too complicated and wasn't useful enough, even as a party trick, to remember once the novelty wore off (on a Thursday).
« Last Edit: 06/05/2013 10:15:22 by dlorde »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
heh :)
I seriously think we're all in the galactic teapot, best described by the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy.
We should present it to the UN. I'm sure they could use it..
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
About the Monty Hall problem.

1. we have differently sized infinities defined mathematically. Would now this reasoning give me a better probability of finding something in a lesser infinity, as you can see that as open and then taking aways 'some room' :)

2. Imagine i have two doors to choose between. Somebody tells me that there was three doors before I got there, but one got taken away containing a goat, to the right side. Will this guarantee better odds for me if I too pick the right side? If it does, isn't this a hidden parameter? Information?
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
About the Monty Hall problem.

1. we have differently sized infinities defined mathematically. Would now this reasoning give me a better probability of finding something in a lesser infinity, as you can see that as open and then taking aways 'some room' :)
Sorry, I don't understand what you're asking here.

Quote
2. Imagine i have two doors to choose between. Somebody tells me that there was three doors before I got there, but one got taken away containing a goat, to the right side. Will this guarantee better odds for me if I too pick the right side? If it does, isn't this a hidden parameter? Information?
No, the probability of you choosing the prize depends on the choices currently available to you. If you have two options and one has the prize, your chances are 1 in 2 (50:50). If there had been a hundred other options removed before you got there, it would make no difference, your chances with the two choices left are still 1in 2.  But if you'd chosen from the options before any were removed, your chances would clearly be 1/number of options, and by switching after the 'dead' options were removed, you'd improve your chances to 1 in 2.
« Last Edit: 12/05/2013 10:09:15 by dlorde »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why wouldn't it give the same odds?
the situation is the same as if I stood before those three doors, seeing him open the one to the right, finding a goat? Instead of being there I get informed of what door that was. Ahh, I think I see, I didn't make that choice before getting informed :)

Then we do 2. again, this time me picking one of the other doors, before getting informed of what door he opened, before removing it, finding that goat. Would my chances now increase in a switch?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Alternatively getting informed of which door he opened to then remove, leaving two choices for me in which I first choose one door of two, to then switch it. Would my chances improve?
 

Offline damocles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Yor_on this is not exactly how the Monty Hall problem works, and it does make a significant difference.
The point is that if you first choose a door and it is wrong, then his hand is forced -- he has only one choice of door to open, and if you change you will be choosing the correct one. So with three doors your chance goes from 1/3 if you stay to 2/3 if you change.
With 100 doors, you have only a 1% chance of choosing the correct door to a 99% chance if you swap (because the presenter has absolutely no choice of which doors to open if you are not correct).
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Not sure what you mean there Damocles? I want to do it as the original thought experiment, the only thing I change is to get informed instead of seeing him opening that door. To me it shouldn't matter for it if he remove that door, leaving two choices for me, before I get there, as long as my information of what he did is valid? Or, does that matter, and if so why?
 

Offline damocles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
It matters because if you choose an incorrect door before he makes his choice, his choice is restricted -- so much restricted that it is a "gimme" in fact.
 

Offline damocles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Here it is spelled out:

There are three equally likely possibilities:

Case 1: Goats Goats Prize
Case 2: Goats Prize Goats
Case 3: Prize Goats Goats

Suppose that you pick the right hand box.
Case 1: if you hold you will get the prize, and by swapping you will lose it
Case 2: when you pick the right hand box, the presenter will be forced to reveal the left hand box, and by swapping you will win the prize
Case 3: when you pick the right hand box, the presenter is forced to reveal the centre box, and by swapping you will win the prize
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
His choice of doors you mean? Assume him to be informed of my choice then. That leaves him the same choices as in the original experiment. Although that wasn't specified in the original that I saw? Otherwise it seems the exact same experiment to me. The door he choose will be 'gone' no matter what choice I make, and for the doors left, be they 99 or two, I already made a choice in both cases. The only thing that differs is him removing the one he opened before I arrive.

Although it seem simpler describing using three doors to me :)
« Last Edit: 12/05/2013 14:32:59 by yor_on »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length