Electronics > Beginners

How fast is a beginner supposed to grow/learn/make?

<< < (4/8) > >>

bjdhjy888:
Speaking of math, I was not good at it at all. It wasn't until I started to work with my PhD coworkers that I realized how important and cool math was. The spirit of doing researches and making things also inspired me to learn electronics. I value them.

The algorithms for IMU projects may involve Kalman filter, which might be difficult math. But I will learn it, and write my codes based on other people's codes.  :)

Thanks, guys!

rstofer:

--- Quote from: bjdhjy888 on September 21, 2019, 11:22:43 am ---Speaking of math, I was not good at it at all. It wasn't until I started to work with my PhD coworkers that I realized how important and cool math was. The spirit of doing researches and making things also inspired me to learn electronics. I value them.

The algorithms for IMU projects may involve Kalman filter, which might be difficult math. But I will learn it, and write my codes based on other people's codes.  :)

Thanks, guys!

--- End quote ---

Big hint:  Nobody is good at math coming out of public schools.  There may be a very few in the AP classes who might have a clue but even they are going to have a climb when Calculus comes up.  And that's just the beginning...

The only way to get through this stuff is in some kind of study group.  A few folks, sitting around a table, solving problems.  It keeps the motivation up, it provides different viewpoints and the practice in known to work.

Good news:  Khan Academy, CalcWorkshop, 3blue1brown, MathTutorDVD are all helpful.  Top two sites:  Desmos.com for graphing and Symbolab.com for solving just about anything with explanations (there is a subscription plan for more detailed explanations).  There are a lot of tools available, resources abound, all it takes is effort.

Don't overlook your community college for many of these math topics.  In fact, the first 2 years of a 5 year program should probably be at the community college level just for cost.  If you go this route, talk to the counselor about the proper sequencing (IMPORTANT) and avoid classes that won't transfer to a college or university.  They have all the details.

scatterandfocus:

--- Quote from: rstofer on September 20, 2019, 02:25:57 pm ---At a hobby level, most 'make' projects are copy-and-paste.  Somebody else did the engineering calcs and thousands of people use the results.  Progress in the 'make' field can be quite fast as long as the hobbyist doesn't bother to go back and figure out how the circuit really works.  I'm thinking about the simple 1 transistor capacitor coupled amplifier with emitter degeneration.  There's a lot of arithmetic in that little circuit.

What is being 'learned'?  Unless the hobbyist is willing to spend the time with datasheets and calculations, the project is just copy-and-paste and very little is actually learned.  That's why college doesn't spend all that much time in the lab and lots of time with calcs.  The standing joke is that new engineers couldn't build a circuit if their life depended on it.  But there wouldn't be a design for the technicians to build were it not for engineers doing the math.

First, decide 'at what level' and then decide on what is to be learned.

--- End quote ---

It seems to me that starting from a 'make' level first would be a good thing, rather than starting from the math end.  Lots of practicalities will be learned as well as gaining some hands-on experience of constructing circuits, while using very basic math.  All sorts of questions will be raised for those who want a better understanding of what is going on, which leads into actually wanting to reach for and use the math end of things.  I strongly subscribe to the idea that so many people have issues with learning math because they don't have immediate practical needs for what is being learned.  In other words, there is nothing there to apply the math to, making it appear to be useless abstractions built on top of other useless abstractions.  It is being pushed onto learners who have no need for it and nothing personally interesting to do with it.

I would make a similar analogy in learning music.  A beginner should start by first having a genuine appetite for music, then start learning the mechanics of playing an instrument, not by learning music theory.  Then the beginner should learn to listen and develop a good ear, along with some very basics of music theory, namely, intervals, chords, and time.  Teaching comprehensive music theory, analysis, and composition from the getgo is the wrong way around.  The beginner has no immediate need for it, doesn't have a good ear and intuition to utilize it well, and doesn't have a range of music under the belt to think about how others have applied it or intuited it.

FreddieChopin:

--- Quote from: bjdhjy888 on September 21, 2019, 11:22:43 am ---But I will learn it, and write my codes based on other people's codes.  :)

--- End quote ---

You won't, you'll copy-paste somewhat working code from SO and pretend to understand it. That's how it always turns out 🍆🍆🍆🍆🍆🍆💦💦💦💦💦💦

rstofer:

--- Quote from: scatterandfocus on September 21, 2019, 03:56:49 pm ---
--- Quote from: rstofer on September 20, 2019, 02:25:57 pm ---First, decide 'at what level' and then decide on what is to be learned.

--- End quote ---

It seems to me that starting from a 'make' level first would be a good thing, rather than starting from the math end.  Lots of practicalities will be learned as well as gaining some hands-on experience of constructing circuits, while using very basic math.  All sorts of questions will be raised for those who want a better understanding of what is going on, which leads into actually wanting to reach for and use the math end of things.  I strongly subscribe to the idea that so many people have issues with learning math because they don't have immediate practical needs for what is being learned.  In other words, there is nothing there to apply the math to, making it appear to be useless abstractions built on top of other useless abstractions.  It is being pushed onto learners who have no need for it and nothing personally interesting to do with it.

--- End quote ---

Absolutely correct.  First define what 'learn' means and then figure out how to get there.  For the vast majority of hobbyists, a few simple ideas (Ohm's Law, Kirchhoff's Laws, Thevenin's Theorem and Norton's Theorem) are about all they will ever need and the arithmetic behind them can be quite simple.  Okay, solving the simultaneous equations that result from circuit analysis can be a bit complex (pun intended for those doing AC circuit analysis) but there are tools for that.  Really simple tools that are easy to use.  The whole thing is no more than simple algebra, sometimes just simple arithmetic.

But it comes down to the definition of 'learn'.  Like a hobbyist or like an engineer?  There's a HUGE difference.

The hobby stuff is a lot more fun!  Just build stuff that interests you.  Learn what you can and move on!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod