ResinTeeth
Bluelighter
Went to class, got an exam back, put together a quick powerpoint and did some research. I will be reading to page 124 in Philosophy of Religion and probably hitting up some Brothers Karamazov for personal reading.
-
Life Advice & Visual Arts
Posting Rules Bluelight Rules 🌌 Share Your Dreams! 🌌 📸 15 Years of Photo Contests 📸 -
LAVA Moderator: Shinji Ikari
What Did You Do For Your Education/Career Today?
- Thread starter Heuristic
- Start date
AmorRoark
Bluelight Crew
^^OMG this makes me smile that you chose my favorite specialty
I had about half my homework due tomorrow completed before noon. The other half I will start at around 3 and work until 5. I also added my current coursework and certification in progress to my resume, and it's ready to be sent to potential winter employers once my resume proofreader has a final look.
I heard from a little bird that my choice is related to what you're doing right now. Awesome! When I tell people I think I'm going to specialize in tax they give me the following facts (in order of prevalence):
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
I think most people have the wrong idea about tax tbh. I would have never considered it had I not taken a course. I'm glad I was wrong!
If I ever end up on the West Coast I'll give you a shout!
QuestionEverything
Bluelight Crew
Good thread.
Today I met with a career services specialist to go over my new resume, registered for a career fair next week, and discussed some possible freelance work/commissions. It was a productive day.
Tomorrow I look at cadavers.
Today I met with a career services specialist to go over my new resume, registered for a career fair next week, and discussed some possible freelance work/commissions. It was a productive day.
Tomorrow I look at cadavers.
satricion
Bluelighter
Today I started mapping out the conceptual relationships in my data and feeling terrified that now after two years I actually have to start writing a fucking phd thesis.
Binge Artist
Bluelighter
^Well, you could always drop out and go to trade school
:D
:D
RedLeader
Bluelight Crew
^ was half-asleep when I wrote that. The math/programming stuff is simply a hobby, partly because I enjoy it and it relaxes me, and partly because I find working on unrelated but challenging problems enhances my performance at work. Nothing to do with a possible career-shift, which at this point is extremely speculative.
If you have any recommendations regarding books, that'd be very welcome. Keep in mind that I'm well below your level of expertise. The calc book is by a guy named Spivak. I enjoy it, but it's much more thorough than I remember my course having been, with a far greater emphasis on proofs.
Ah, gotcha (I can just see the expressions of people reading about math helping to relax you!). Spivak's Calculus isn't a bad book at all. I mean I'd say there are a few better ones out there, but again if you find it comfortable (or should I say "relaxing"
), then I'd stick with it. It's so important in mathematics to be comfortable with your textbooks. Regarding other books, well if it's for a hobby (as well as a benefit for your daily life), the path I'd suggest would be that of set-theory and mathematical logic. From talking with you in S&T, I know that you have a decent grasp on logical themes and the how it's applied to everyday life. What you stand to gain through ST&ML is, like with Spivak & Calculus, a bottom-up construction of the logic that you know, a philosophical appreciation for what it means, and full mathematical rigor about how our common system of logic can be tweaked to form new logics and such. Going on this, Herbert B. Enderton is the author you want.
Elements of Set Theory
A Mathematical Introduction to Logic
These should be read in this order (but don't have to be). Both start off at a 2nd or 3rd year undergraduate pace (you'd be fine), and progress to rigorous proofs of the Incompleteness Theorems and such. Basically a "get as far as you can" type o effort. I cannot stress enough, though, that Enderton is an amazing author, these books tickle the mathematical fancy, and IMPORTANTLY they teach you a lot about how to think about mathematical proofs. Meaning that if you want to go beyond calculus (let's say to measure theory, which is really the most profound area of math IMHO), you'll be better prepared to understand what comes next if you get a lot from the Enderton books.
In terms of a "Putnam-style" book, I would suggest Mathematical Miniatures. Don't tell Binge Artist, but I actually use it as a resource for coming up with some of those puzzlers in the S&T thread! But it contains a lot of problems form contests worldwide, and isn't too technical or anything.
Binge Artist
Bluelighter
Speaking of puzzlers, I'd say it's about time for a new one...
RedLeader
Bluelight Crew
I just realized that H posted one in that thread a while back. Given that I have no car until Tuesday, might as well give it a go...
Binge Artist
Bluelighter
Already nailed it...
But...what the hell...knock yourself out, ol buddy
But...what the hell...knock yourself out, ol buddy
Called an employer to see if they'd made any decisions as to who was getting called back for 2nd interviews. He didn't know at the time, but an hour later I got a call back saying I have another interview on Monday... Fuck yeah! I hope it's just going over paperwork and shit for the job.
CoffeeDrinker
Bluelighter
I went to a college visit today. I am pretty jazzed about that! SUNY ESF. I can't wait to get the hell out of North Chili.
Heuristic
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2009
- Messages
- 3,263
Congrats Kzorro. Jobs are tough to come by in this economy, and resilience like that will really pay off.
Satricion, someone once told me that only the mediocre never worry about their performance; the intelligent and the talented can always see beyond what they can already do, and what they have already attained. Just don't fall into the trap of killing a new idea with a thousand criticisms before you ever allow yourself to pursue it. Especially for someone accustomed to reading and viewing everything with a sharply critical eye, it can be difficult to relax that eye a little, and allow a new idea to develop and flourish before finding reasons why it shouldn't. I may mock your odd fascination with ridiculous theorists who suffer from the misfortune of being French and published, but I actually think you'll have some really interesting things to say.
Redleader, and BA, thank you both for the recommendations. Since the proofs are what I'm least familiar with at the moment, I think I'll put off Rudin for a time. I've got a strong background in analytic philosophy, and so I'm comfortable with symbolic logic and proofs as such. Some of the mathematical proofs, though, can take me some time to understand, particularly if they are, for my level, a bit too concise. Hopefully those books will help in that regard, Redleader.
Definitely relaxing though... the logical rigor, clarity, and the remarkable extent of what can be constructed from a few axioms (until now I hadn't seen calculus built from a precise foundation), is extremely beautiful, and actually kind of exciting. Well... there have been a few times when I found it a little difficult to shift gears from a frustrating problem that looked really easy at first to actual work, especially if my commute ended before I could finish the problem. I found it pretty difficult to prove that certain given numbers could not be rational (no snickering BL mathematicians!); I may have walked into work looking distracted and frustrated that particular morning, and certainly one of my colleagues was mildly confused later that day to glance over at my notes during a meeting and find whimsical permutations of "p/q = sqrt 3" scattered across the page.
Satricion, someone once told me that only the mediocre never worry about their performance; the intelligent and the talented can always see beyond what they can already do, and what they have already attained. Just don't fall into the trap of killing a new idea with a thousand criticisms before you ever allow yourself to pursue it. Especially for someone accustomed to reading and viewing everything with a sharply critical eye, it can be difficult to relax that eye a little, and allow a new idea to develop and flourish before finding reasons why it shouldn't. I may mock your odd fascination with ridiculous theorists who suffer from the misfortune of being French and published, but I actually think you'll have some really interesting things to say.
Redleader, and BA, thank you both for the recommendations. Since the proofs are what I'm least familiar with at the moment, I think I'll put off Rudin for a time. I've got a strong background in analytic philosophy, and so I'm comfortable with symbolic logic and proofs as such. Some of the mathematical proofs, though, can take me some time to understand, particularly if they are, for my level, a bit too concise. Hopefully those books will help in that regard, Redleader.
Definitely relaxing though... the logical rigor, clarity, and the remarkable extent of what can be constructed from a few axioms (until now I hadn't seen calculus built from a precise foundation), is extremely beautiful, and actually kind of exciting.
Well... there have been a few times when I found it a little difficult to shift gears from a frustrating problem that looked really easy at first to actual work, especially if my commute ended before I could finish the problem. I found it pretty difficult to prove that certain given numbers could not be rational (no snickering BL mathematicians!); I may have walked into work looking distracted and frustrated that particular morning, and certainly one of my colleagues was mildly confused later that day to glance over at my notes during a meeting and find whimsical permutations of "p/q = sqrt 3" scattered across the page.
Binge Artist
Bluelighter
^when you get older, you'll probably find concise mathematics easier to read; it's almost like you'll reach a point where "extra details" do nothing but bog you down.
Also, it's good practice, in general, to prove the theorems on your own...and only look at the author's version to double check your work, see which one of you is more "elegant"...or, in absolutely desperate situations, to get yourself unstuck. I think very little is to be gained from being "spoon-fed" mathematics.
One of my complaints about Spivak, is that it falls into this weird category, where it's too "analysis-ey" for a calculus book...and yet too "calculus-ey" for an analysis book.
My recommendation would be to start off with one of those "500 page NYC telephone books" that most universities use for "Calc 1 through n", and then afterwards, switch over directly to baby Rudin.
Oh, and lol @ having to prove that some numbers can't be rational. Yes, most calculus books like to start off that way (even Rudin), but don't "over-think" this; the whole point is simply to show that there are "gaps" in the rational system. Nothing more. Also, it's really a waste to time trying to kill yourself showing that the cube root of five is irrational. There is a very elementary way in basic number theory to show that if a/b ain't an integer, then neither is (a/b)^n.
Now that you mention it...lol...I do recall Rudin using a very bizzare set up to show that the square root of two is irrational. I remember almost having to stand on my head to get what he was saying. BUT...one advantage of the curious way he did it, if memory serves me right, is that he also showed that one could come arbitrarily close to sqrt 2. And the concept of "arbitrarily close" is something you're gonna have to burn into your soul if you ever want to properly understand calculus/analysis.
Also, it's good practice, in general, to prove the theorems on your own...and only look at the author's version to double check your work, see which one of you is more "elegant"...or, in absolutely desperate situations, to get yourself unstuck. I think very little is to be gained from being "spoon-fed" mathematics.
One of my complaints about Spivak, is that it falls into this weird category, where it's too "analysis-ey" for a calculus book...and yet too "calculus-ey" for an analysis book.
My recommendation would be to start off with one of those "500 page NYC telephone books" that most universities use for "Calc 1 through n", and then afterwards, switch over directly to baby Rudin.
Oh, and lol @ having to prove that some numbers can't be rational. Yes, most calculus books like to start off that way (even Rudin), but don't "over-think" this; the whole point is simply to show that there are "gaps" in the rational system. Nothing more. Also, it's really a waste to time trying to kill yourself showing that the cube root of five is irrational. There is a very elementary way in basic number theory to show that if a/b ain't an integer, then neither is (a/b)^n.
Now that you mention it...lol...I do recall Rudin using a very bizzare set up to show that the square root of two is irrational. I remember almost having to stand on my head to get what he was saying. BUT...one advantage of the curious way he did it, if memory serves me right, is that he also showed that one could come arbitrarily close to sqrt 2. And the concept of "arbitrarily close" is something you're gonna have to burn into your soul if you ever want to properly understand calculus/analysis.
Binge Artist
Bluelighter
Oh, and just for kicks:
Let a, b, & n be (positive) integers, and suppose that a/b is NOT an integer. Equivalently, there is a prime divisor, p, of b that does not divide a. Thus, p (also a prime divisor of b^n) does not divide a^n. Thus, (a/b)^n is ALSO not an integer.
The implication here, for example, is that since the 11 th root of 17 is clearly not an integer, it's likewise not rational.
Behold, the miracle of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.
Let a, b, & n be (positive) integers, and suppose that a/b is NOT an integer. Equivalently, there is a prime divisor, p, of b that does not divide a. Thus, p (also a prime divisor of b^n) does not divide a^n. Thus, (a/b)^n is ALSO not an integer.
The implication here, for example, is that since the 11 th root of 17 is clearly not an integer, it's likewise not rational.
Behold, the miracle of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.
Carsick
Bluelight Crew
Spent some time job searching and calling recruiters.
Binge Artist
Bluelighter
BTW, Heuristic...I'm not exactly clear on your reasons for taking up axiomatic mathematics as a hobby.
From what I gather, you were a philosophy student. Accordingly, you should have the logical background to jump straight into any upper level undergrad mathematics book that's "self contained" (eg, Spivak makes use of basic topology, but he clearly defines all the concepts, more or less from scratch; hence, his book is "self contained" in the sense that you don't need any prior topological readings under your belt).
Are you just interested in seeing how mathematics is build "from the bottom up"?
Reason I ask, I knew quite a few math majors who were very adept at reading proofs, but who could create none that required original, creative thinking.
To me, mathematics was always more of a "tool" than something to be learned in and of itself, just for enjoyment. This is not to say that I was an "applied math" guy by any means. Save that pansy shit for RedLeader
. What I mean is, I had no interest in any kind of mathematics that didn't...and here words are failing me a bit...somehow "mold" my mind to be able to solve problems that I otherwise couldn't have solved.
If you're interested, I'll make an effort to clarify what I've written.
From what I gather, you were a philosophy student. Accordingly, you should have the logical background to jump straight into any upper level undergrad mathematics book that's "self contained" (eg, Spivak makes use of basic topology, but he clearly defines all the concepts, more or less from scratch; hence, his book is "self contained" in the sense that you don't need any prior topological readings under your belt).
Are you just interested in seeing how mathematics is build "from the bottom up"?
Reason I ask, I knew quite a few math majors who were very adept at reading proofs, but who could create none that required original, creative thinking.
To me, mathematics was always more of a "tool" than something to be learned in and of itself, just for enjoyment. This is not to say that I was an "applied math" guy by any means. Save that pansy shit for RedLeader
. What I mean is, I had no interest in any kind of mathematics that didn't...and here words are failing me a bit...somehow "mold" my mind to be able to solve problems that I otherwise couldn't have solved. If you're interested, I'll make an effort to clarify what I've written.
Mariposa
Bluelight Crew
I heard from a little bird that my choice is related to what you're doing right now. Awesome! When I tell people I think I'm going to specialize in tax they give me the following facts (in order of prevalence):
I think most people have the wrong idea about tax tbh. I would have never considered it had I not taken a course. I'm glad I was wrong!
Tax is one part of life (the other is death, thanks Franklin) that won't be going away. I believe you've made a sound decision, and I hear ya - I like it too.
I especially like estate/trust and tax planning combined. There's a lot more creativity involved in building wealth and prosperity for a family legacy than there is for arguing some crap motion your boss is out golfing instead of arguing Not a lot of young people will touch T&E or taxation. If you are the type of person who does not mind rambling mentors in their 70s, you've made the right call. I personally loved it, the hours are killer from Jan-April, so make sure to get a good winter vacation in - your life will not be your own for 3 months of the year!
Other than that, quality of life and salary are amazing, and you'll get a lot of recognition in your firm.I'll be able to give some formal advice in the new capacity, which will be cool.
It will tie in with the old somehow - and what I am doing to improve both education and career is to call and chat with my retired boss about where should I go once I graduate
He's almost 80 and always happy to hear from me.
AmorRoark
Bluelight Crew
I'm well-versed in the life of a tax person. My mother was an active CPA every tax season while I was a kid then switched to full-time once I was out of elementary school. And yes, I'm looking forward to ramblings of old tax gurus. I actually have a meeting with my mom's old boss (and by old I mean she was employed by him 30 years ago) next week!
We met by complete chance: i.e. "Amy ******? Are you Betty ******'s daughter?" "Why yes!"
Good luck with your new pathway!
And yes, I'm looking forward to ramblings of old tax gurus. I actually have a meeting with my mom's old boss (and by old I mean she was employed by him 30 years ago) next week! We met by complete chance: i.e. "Amy ******? Are you Betty ******'s daughter?" "Why yes!"
Good luck with your new pathway!
rangrz
Bluelighter
worked on my point shooting with a Benelli super 90 shotgun going with 3.5 inch slugs and 000 mixed. Got it back on track despite my injury. So I thusly stay qualified and don't get a review and medical discharge.