2

I work as a software engineer, but I don't have a maths background. I have long been interested in refreshing anything after/including pre-algebra. Often times I am reading papers and these have all these formulas I can't decipher. I think the bigger issue is that I don't even know how to ask the question. Essentially, I want to go from 'can't read' to 'can read and understand the maths being used (even if the problem domain may still not be clear)' - where should I start?

Thanks for all the comments and answers. I can't reply/upvote directly because I joined this site straight away, but I'll reply to some questions/statements below:

One example of a formula (apologies, I can't seem to copy it off the pdf and paste here) page 28 http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse567-06/ftp/k_24its.pdf

I am familiar with some of the symbols, for example, the greek E that means (performs?) sum. I understand some set's notation. Sometimes the difficulty lies also in understanding the precedence order and how to transform it into something more readable, so I can follow it along.

I think in general, I was hoping that there would be some area in mathematics that focused on the learning and practice of maths by means of expressing yourself using these symbols, but it seems a bit clearer now that that's not the case and it's probably all scattered around the place ? (confirmation would be appreciated)

1 Answers1

0

Sometimes Greek letters are just variables, perhaps with conventions for what they mean, like $\nu$ for a frequency. Sometimes they have a special meaning: $\pi$, of course, and $\Sigma$ for sums.

You could ask particular questions here and learn bit by bit - show us a formula from a paper you're reading, with some of the context, and ask for an explanation of the parts you don't understand.

(Please learn enough mathjax to format the mathematics correctly.)

Ethan Bolker
  • 95,224
  • 7
  • 108
  • 199
  • The sad thing is whether the symbol have a specific meaning or are variable is an intuition one has to develop. Consider the following meaningless statement $\chi_{\alpha \in \sigma}\rho(p_{\alpha}^{\beta_{\alpha}}) = \omicron(\sigma)$. How would you intuitively know $\alpha, \beta$ are variables but the others aren't? I'm not sure I can answer that except ...."well, it looks that way" – fleablood Sep 27 '16 at 23:53
  • @fleablood Of course with that statement you couldn't. But asking about a short equation from a paper the OP's reading, with some surrounding text and his head start on the problem might get him a useful answer. The pure math part might be straightforward (but not yet for him). Someone here might know something about the context. Let's see if he tries. – Ethan Bolker Sep 28 '16 at 00:05
  • Oh, I agree. But it's easy to dismiss this question "oh, you just don't know the math; when you know the math it will all make sense" whereas I think there is a legitimate concern developing intuition. Obviously $\sigma (a_n)$ means something specific but equally obviously $p^{\beta}$ does not. It's not as obvious as it seems if you don't know it. Unfortunately I don't have any idea how to advise anyone how to develop this intuition. – fleablood Sep 28 '16 at 00:38