Proposal: "Math for beginners" subforum

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

DUE DILIGENCE.

I complain that people have not done it before they post.

Then, of course you understand and accept that others may complain when you have not done it before you post, don't you?

- - -

By the way, do you have any particular objection to having others apply your stated standards to your own posts? If so, what is it?

[Peter Nelson]

Originally Posted by TravisT

For a very simple and shallow reason, I object to the suggestion of "Math(s) for normal people" and "Math(s) for mathematicians" because of the implication that mathematicians aren't normal ;)

Despite that there exist mathematicians who certainly aren't normal, I would very much prefer that we don't apply a label, or imply one. I know that in high school, I didn't pursue math further because I didn't think I was a "math-type" Turns out that it's probably the most defining thing about me.

LOL when I suggested "maths for normal people", I did think it possible someone might respond to query the notion that mathematicians are somehow abnormal (ie not normal people too)!

I'm sure there are "normal" mathematicians really, and before anyone starts, I don't want to hear jokes or puns based on the mathematical meaning of the term "normal".

Perhaps it could be "Maths for Mathematicians" and "Maths for the rest of us"!

[Peter Nelson]

Several people have pointed out that the forum rules do not lay out the stringent requirements which Mr Silverman and some others may prefer.

Obviously threads like "word association" and "you must be addicted to gimps if...." are hardly rigorous!

However, I would not object at all to a particular area of the forum where there were higher expectations of the postings.

As some users clearly would like to have this, I support the proposal to create a "mathematics for mathematicians" forum where the discussions could take a more rigorous academic approach. In fact I believe such an area would be highly useful.

As for myself, although I have read a little around the subject of primes, factoring etc, I freely confess:

I have NEVER read any BOOK on number theory. Ever. (I did get as far as looking in bookshops and libraries for a text on prime numbers but was not impressed by the ones I found).
I HAVE read many books and papers at Masters and PhD level in subjects other than pure mathematics (and do for instance agree with recommendations to read Knuth's Art of Computer Programming volumes)
I do NOT possess a maths degree (although I did some maths at undergraduate level)
I do not consider these requirements for participation in any of the forums!

For example I may be able to contribute something to GIMPS in Computer Science (or Marketing, or any other subject). BUT to do so I may want to ask about something mathematical to understand the math, (or ask what to read to find out) with the realisation that I am not nor ever will be a math specialist. I don't need to be because there are plenty of those around.

Therefore I want a place under the category of maths where I can ask a question and not put it in the form of a formal proof (I don't know how to at this level). I reserve the right to use natural wooly language rather than the precise terminology that mathematicians speak in for their work daily.

As some assumed the existing maths area to be exclusively the domain of mathematicians (or wished this were the case) it would be nice to provide room for both, and it appears logical to me to split the existing maths area into two complementary areas. This need not have the effect of polarising the user community. An inappropriate post in the "Advanced Maths" area could be politely relocated out of it for low-level discussions and learning.

PS. Sometimes, Bob's point about Due Diligence DOES have validity. It would be nice if everyone could for example check "readme.txt" or FAQs or search the forum in case the subject came up already BEFORE posting. Alas we live in a culture where people are used to running software before reading any documentation. It is not always obvious whether someone has made any effort so I would generally give the benefit of the doubt.
eg say "your answer is in the readme.txt" OR provide the actual answer.

However, I know from experience that sometimes it is quicker to simply ask a question than try to wade through many papers looking for something which is obvious to the knowledgeable. I therefore don't object to people using their own time responsibly by posting their question rather than searching in the dark for a needle in a haystack.

Sometimes, one person asks a "dumb" question that another 10 don't know the answer to either, so a single response can educate all 11 readers although we have no visibility of this.

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by Peter Nelson

It would be nice if everyone could for example check "readme.txt" or FAQs or search the forum in case the subject came up already BEFORE posting. Alas we live in a culture where people are used to running software before reading any documentation.
.
.
.
I know from experience that sometimes it is quicker to simply ask a question than try to wade through many papers looking for something which is obvious to the knowledgeable. I therefore don't object to people using their own time responsibly by posting their question rather than searching in the dark for a needle in a haystack.

I'm planning to compile a more extensive GIMPS/forum/related-math FAQ than we have at present. I'd start by systematically combing through past forum (and mailing list) submissions, cataloging the most frequent and/or important questiions and the clearest, most informative answers (including those in existing FAQs). Then the result would be a new edition (possibly with changes in existing FAQs).

A primary design criterion of the new edition would be the ease with which veteran forum members could use it to answer new postings by simply linking to the appropriate FAQ in response to any question we'd all seen before. ("My CPU runs 100%", "ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.40". "How does L-L work?", ...) My idea is that this new edition would be in HTML on the mersenneforum.org website with lots of indexing to make the above criterion possible, though details could vary.

I intend to have a first draft ready by July-ish.

My intention is to be able to, as often as possible, answer a newbie question NOT with the old

"read the FAQ or readme" or "here's my explanation (for the umpteenth time)" or even "do a search in subforum ABC",

but with

"Here's an answer: link to specific FAQ item about what newbie asked. If this doesn't answer all your question(s), please post a followup here."

And have that "canned" somewhere so that it'd take only a few clicks to insert it as response.

Sometimes, one person asks a "dumb" question that another 10 don't know the answer to either, so a single response can educate all 11 readers although we have no visibility of this.

And my vision is to enable veterans to quickly and easily respond to most frequently-asked "dumb" questions by simply pointing to a specific FAQ, as often as possible, rather than recomposing an answer for the 50th time. Or maybe point to a specific FAQ, then supplement it quickly.

[devarajkandadai]

Originally Posted by Mystwalker

Hi all,

as there have been some uncomfortable threads lately, I thought of a possible solution that could satisfy everyone.

My personal opinions/assumptions:

1. The math experts here often want to help others with their math-related questions. But they require that the questioner has already done some investigations for him/herself and to provide the problem in a form that the experts can understand and help in a minimal amount of their precious time. All that is totally ok with me.

2. Even beginners with "unsufficient" math skills to meet the requirements written above have questions they like to be answered. In addition, they might be driven be fascination about mathematics, so a rejection would probably be counter-productive (lost time due to flaming, possible lost potentials, lost GIMPS members, ...).


My idea is to create a "Math for beginners" subforum. Here, everyone is allowed to ask questions, regardless of his/her skill level. My hope is that they (start to?) embrace mathematics (seeing that a lot of people don't think that more than school math is ever needed and all mathematicians live in ivory towers). Chances are that some are that interested that they really try to learn more. Even if their skills won't benefit GIMPS or individuals/groups in this forum, I think it's good for "mankind as a whole" (every little bit helps... ).
Apart from that, it should definitely help GIMPS, as I guess many of those people will devote (some of) their computing power to this project.

On the other hand, this would free the "real" math subforum. Maybe Bob et al. could think up some "requirements" (books, papers, ...) that persons posting in this forum should meet. If necessary, a threads can be moved to the beginners subforum.

Of course, no expert is restricted from the beginners forum, instead, he's of course very welcome.


Well, this was my idea. If there are few to no supporters, I don't mind. Even then, maybe others have better solutions to restore peace and harmony to this forum.

Let me start the ball rolling by posing a small problem.Needless to say only rank amateurs should respond:

Prove that every odd prime number is a factor of 2^n-1, for some value of n or other.
A.K. Devaraj

[99.94]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

I'm planning to compile a more extensive GIMPS/forum/related-math FAQ than we have at present. I'd start by systematically combing through past forum (and mailing list) submissions, cataloging the most frequent and/or important questiions and the clearest, most informative answers (including those in existing FAQs). Then the result would be a new edition (possibly with changes in existing FAQs).

A primary design criterion of the new edition would be the ease with which veteran forum members could use it to answer new postings by simply linking to the appropriate FAQ in response to any question we'd all seen before. ("My CPU runs 100%", "ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.40". "How does L-L work?", ...) My idea is that this new edition would be in HTML on the mersenneforum.org website with lots of indexing to make the above criterion possible, though details could vary.

I intend to have a first draft ready by July-ish.

My intention is to be able to, as often as possible, answer a newbie question NOT with the old

"read the FAQ or readme" or "here's my explanation (for the umpteenth time)" or even "do a search in subforum ABC",

but with

"Here's an answer: link to specific FAQ item about what newbie asked. If this doesn't answer all your question(s), please post a followup here."

And have that "canned" somewhere so that it'd take only a few clicks to insert it as response.


And my vision is to enable veterans to quickly and easily respond to most frequently-asked "dumb" questions by simply pointing to a specific FAQ, as often as possible, rather than recomposing an answer for the 50th time. Or maybe point to a specific FAQ, then supplement it quickly.

And I am looking forward to that very much. I think it will be really valuable.

[Fusion_power]

Let me start the ball rolling by posing a small problem.Needless to say only rank amateurs should respond:

Prove that every odd prime number is a factor of 2^n-1, for some value of n or other.
A.K. Devaraj

LOL Devaraj,

Thats almost like proving that only odd numbers are prime (2 excepted).

Fusion

[mfgoode]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

I think everyone is missing the point.

This isn't about math. Or math knowledge.

It is about DUE DILIGENCE.

I complain that people have not done it before they post.

*ANY* teacher gets annoyed when people ask for help without first
having done their reading and/or homework. Noone should be posting
in this forum without having studied at least one book in elementary
number theory. Noone should be discussing "derivatives" if they don't
know their definition. etc.

I agree with the sentiments expressed in this forum that posters should do a bit of preparation before they either answer or shoot a question straight from the hip!
Preferably they should study the subject as far as they can or surf the net for clarification before anything concrete is presented. Writing a post out first especially an original one is good practice.

As in the Pythagorean brotherhood's conception of mathematics as part of a sane and civilised living an interest in the Quadrivium- Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy and Music, was very essential and so it should it be for our posters.
As Plato had boldly inscribed on the Portals of his academy "Those ignorant of Geometry, enter Not these Portals". The same for m'forum.
Gauss took a lot of pains before he wrote on his topics and had the motto
'Pauca sed Matura.' (which means Few but Mature (ripe)).
Let us not concentrate on the quantity of posts rather than the Quality of posts submitted. This rule should apply to both newbies AND experts.
Mally.