Almost all scientifically relevant math is describing operations that our brain has already learned to compute for the purposes of perception. Our curriculum builds math in insulation from the mind, instead of pointing at how it already deals with change, space and expectation.
-
-
Show this thread
-
The relationship between arithmetic, linear algebra and geometry comes across as a surprising coincidence, which is like telling a joke backwards while forgetting to mention its punchline.
Show this thread -
It's as if we taught music by starting with finger exercises, then teaching the manipulation of lots of complicated notation, and mentioning in passing that it could theoretically help with all that singing and instrumental playing that we are doing intuitively every day.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is why I loved learning computer graphics so much. I was like: “oh! So *this* is what math is for!” Do you recommend any books that do teach math in the correct order?
-
I think I would recommend youtube. There must be great math books out there, but I am not up to date.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
good! now do chemistry!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Agreed, and i'll go further, we need to go to a 12 based numerical system. The 10 base is antinatural, i sense that the brain is operating subconsciously on base 12. We can also teach the whole basic calculus in images of 360 degrees pie charts. That would help kids a lot.
-
Historically, 12 has been used for several important things: 12 months in a year, 12 hours in a day, 12 notes in an octave. It seems to have been an ancient tradition. However, we have ten fingers, so 10 is a natural base for counting.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.