this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

Science Memes

11161 readers
2260 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"All the little bits"

top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PixelProf@lemmy.ca 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

There was a lovely computer science book for kids I can't remember the name of, and it was all about the evil jargon trying to prevent people from mastering the magical skills of programming and algorithms. I love these approaches. I grew up in an extremely non/anti-academic environment, and I learned to explain things in non-academic ways, and it's really helped me as an intro lecturer.

Jargon is the mind killer. Shorthands are for the people who have enough expertise to really feel the depths of that shorthand and use it to tickle the old familiar neurons they represent without needing to do the whole dance. It's easy to forget that to a newcomer, the symbol is just a symbol.

[–] modeler@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I must not use jargon.

Jargon is the mind-killer.

Jargon is the little-death that brings total confusion. I will face the jargon. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the jargon has gone there will be clarity. Only sense will remain.

[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

Jargon is the little-death

Somewhere in France someone is getting really excited about learning jargon.

[–] sundray@lemmus.org 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] khannie@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

All the little bits by my side...

[–] runner_g@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 months ago

"All the, derivatives. True care. Truth brings."

[–] jukibom@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I would've absolutely paid more attention in maths if the learning material was this utterly contemptuous of "ordinary mathematicians" haha

also full Project Gutenberg text is here https://calculusmadeeasy.org/, thanks for sharing!

[–] 5oap10116@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I'm a chemical engineer and I now better understand calculus slightly better from this post. I did a whole lot of "okkayyy ...let's just stick to the process and wait for this whole thing to blow over"

I know what they were asking me to do but I never really fully understood everything.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

okkayyy...let's just stick to the process and wait for this whole thing to blow over

This is such a classic engineer brain solution to the problem. It just warms my heart.

[–] 5oap10116@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

When I started algebra in something like 5th grade I had a huge issue with f(x) and the best answer my teacher gave me was that "the equation is a function of x" and couldn't explain it differently and I couldn't get over the fact that we are not multiplying whatever f is by X. "If we're going to set precedent with notation at least be fucking consistent" - 5th grade me probably

[–] gramie@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I also studied chemical engineering, and throughout high school and university that was exactly it. Calculus was a kind of magic, and you just had to learn all the spells.

With this book I finally understood why the derivative of x^2 is 2x.

[–] pythonoob@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Ok I'm no mathematician but I'll still can't see why d(x^2) = 2x.

[–] gramie@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago

This exact explanation is in the book: https://calculusmadeeasy.org/4.html

[–] 5oap10116@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I tried to figure it out myself back in high school but the best I came up with is X^2 -->2x because it just fucking does.

[–] Solace_Firebird@mander.xyz 0 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I have finally discovered my niche content: math texts that are irreverent and also defiantly uncomplicated.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] new_guy@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)
[–] Solace_Firebird@mander.xyz 1 points 6 months ago

A little confused, but they've got the spirit.

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

What's this about the ears on an elephant?

[–] evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Read "a mathematicians lament", by Paul Lockhart. It was originally a short essay (25 pages you can find free online), but expanded into a book that I haven't read yet.

In a similar vein is Shape, by Jordan Ellenberg.

[–] Solace_Firebird@mander.xyz 1 points 6 months ago

I read a short paper called "Lockheart's Lament", but I didn't realize he had expanded on it. I might have cried about that one. Thanks for the reccomendations!

[–] stelelor@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Thank you for this beautiful example of using "defiantly" correctly!

[–] rpr@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago

He defiantly used it properly, definitely.