General > General Technical Chat

Admit your Brain lock

<< < (28/39) > >>

Zero999:

--- Quote from: CatalinaWOW on April 04, 2024, 02:31:36 am ---
--- Quote from: Circlotron on April 03, 2024, 10:59:24 pm ---
--- Quote from: IanB on April 03, 2024, 03:27:18 pm ---It's odd (what coppice said). Mathematics does not have fuzzy marking like, say, a language exam. If you get all answers correct, you would get 100%. There is a marking scheme with marks allocated to each question according to each part of the answer that needs to be provided to obtain the marks. For someone to get 93% that means that marks were dropped somewhere, probably due to not providing some expected element of some answers, or maybe by being incorrect in some answers that were given.

--- End quote ---
Unfortunately, mathematics is not what is used to be in the minds of some people. Get a load of this nonsense.

--- End quote ---

WOW.  In these four pages there is a small amount of truth and potential added value.  Buried among a lot of trash, and wit much opportunity to misunderstand the little that is useful.

--- End quote ---
Unfortunately this thread has become full of boastfulness and overinflated egos, rather than attempts at providing useful information. :palm:


--- Quote from: tggzzz on April 03, 2024, 11:06:09 pm ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on April 03, 2024, 09:19:55 pm ---
--- Quote from: IanB on April 03, 2024, 02:36:22 pm ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on April 03, 2024, 12:38:09 pm ---A simple example:
VC(t) = ϵ(1−e−t/τ)

--- End quote ---

There may be a kind of analogy here with natural language. When I read and write, I don't see words as a group of letters, I seem them as pictures. Hence I quickly sense if a word is spelled incorrectly because when I see it the picture looks wrong.

When I look at the equation above, I also don't see a formula, I see pictures. I see voltage as a function of time, and I see that being a small number scaling a first order rise with a given time constant.

(If ϵ does not actually represent a small number, then that would be a poor choice of symbol in the equation.)

--- End quote ---
I just see letter and numbers. I read ϵ and e and t and τ the same. Then there's the nonsense of having lower and upper case in the same formula.

--- End quote ---

OK, so you literally can't comprehend the formula. Shame, but that the "fault" lies with you, not with maths or the notation.
--- End quote ---
Oh course I understand the formula. I just read it as numbers and letters. The notation is at fault because it would be easier to learn, if it didn't use similar letters.  |O

elektryk:
Maths... How about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_field_theory ?

m k:

--- Quote from: coppice on April 03, 2024, 02:44:02 pm ---When I was at school I never got above 93% in maths. All answers correct. All workings shown. That got me 93% consistently. 70% would get you an A

--- End quote ---

Here completion of 12 years, the second level, theoretical side, has a final exam where each subject has two hours.
(pre requirement for university, from that route)
All results are gaussian, or at least used to be.
If memory serves 5% will fail.

Second level of practical side, maybe a career college, had 5 to 9 scoring.
Full scale was 4 to 10, but school was paid by graduates, so nobody was perfect and practically all graduated.
Employers had also plenty of levels to choose.
Now it's three levels.
3 is for those who know what they should.
2 is for those who at least tried hard.
1 is for do not hire.

Practical side is also reformed from earlier decades.
Old career college time was stretched so that it got a higher EU level status.
Level of education practically remained.
New career college was also created and its level was lowered.

Now all reformed old career college graduates get a title engineer.
The problem is that current graduates are still using the old title scale.
Practical result is that construction foremen are no more, everybody are construction engineers.

For some reason construction foreman education is restarting.

tggzzz:

--- Quote from: Zero999 on April 04, 2024, 07:06:21 am ---
--- Quote from: tggzzz on April 03, 2024, 11:06:09 pm ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on April 03, 2024, 09:19:55 pm ---
--- Quote from: IanB on April 03, 2024, 02:36:22 pm ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on April 03, 2024, 12:38:09 pm ---A simple example:
VC(t) = ϵ(1−e−t/τ)

--- End quote ---

There may be a kind of analogy here with natural language. When I read and write, I don't see words as a group of letters, I seem them as pictures. Hence I quickly sense if a word is spelled incorrectly because when I see it the picture looks wrong.

When I look at the equation above, I also don't see a formula, I see pictures. I see voltage as a function of time, and I see that being a small number scaling a first order rise with a given time constant.

(If ϵ does not actually represent a small number, then that would be a poor choice of symbol in the equation.)

--- End quote ---
I just see letter and numbers. I read ϵ and e and t and τ the same. Then there's the nonsense of having lower and upper case in the same formula.

--- End quote ---

OK, so you literally can't comprehend the formula. Shame, but that the "fault" lies with you, not with maths or the notation.
--- End quote ---
Oh course I understand the formula. I just read it as numbers and letters. The notation is at fault because it would be easier to learn, if it didn't use similar letters.  |O

--- End quote ---

Well, that is a clearer statement. Because you have difficulty distinguishing between different letters, the notation everybody uses is wrong.

Provided the semantics of the equation and variables is adequately described/understood, I don't see any strong cause for complaint.

IanB:
This thread has been a bit of a revelation to me.

Previously, I would not have imagined that there are people who might have trouble seeing the difference between \$t\$ and \$\tau\$ in a formula. Or who might not make the immediate mental association that \$t\$ = "time" and that \$\tau\$ = "time constant".

Or that it is natural that both symbols are different forms of "t", since both symbols represent time and correspondingly have the same dimensions. It is thus a deliberate choice to have things this way, and the association of "t" with time would be lost if different symbols were used.

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